


ie ie 45 
Nitin y, 
it eats 


ny 





30 
355 
$22 
i905 


\ EXPANDED METAL? 
) FIRE ea 








D. E. GARRISON, 
President. 


Date GARRISON, JT; 
Sec’y and Treas. 


A. L. JOHNSON, M. Am. Soe. C. E., 
Chief Engineer. 


St. Louis Expanded Metal Fireproofing Go; 
Suite 606 Century Building, 
ST. LOUIS, MO. 











SOLE AGENTS FOR THE SALE OF = 





CORRUGATED BARS. 











SUB-AGENCIES. 


H. C. MILLER & CoO., 

1 Madison Av., New York City. 
HDWARD AW DUCK ER, Gr H:, 

683 Atlantic Av., Boston, Mass. 
WALTER LORING WEBB, C. E., 


2222 Land Title Bldg., Philadelphia. 


CHAS! EO WALTHBHERS, Cy EH. 
507 House Bldg., Pittsburg, Pa. 
SYDNEY B. WILLIAMSON, C. E., 
Baltimore, Maryland. 
WOOLSEY CROWE SUPPLY CO., 
252 Oak Street, Portland, Ore. 


OMAHA STRUCTURAL STEEL WORKS, 


Omaha, Nebraska. 
Ss. G SHAW & CoO., 
Boston Bldg., Denver, Colo. 
VON HAMM-YOUNG CoO., Ltd., 
Honolulu, T. H. 
SMITH & DAVIS, 
Aguiar 81, Havana, Cuba. 


EASTERN ENG. & CONTRACTING CO., 


13 Canton Road, Shanghai, China. 


COLONIAL TRADING CO.(For Panama.) 

26 Cortland St., New York City. 
BUFFALO EXPANDED METAL CO., 

D. S. Morgan Bldg., Buffalo, N. Y. 
Teele CONDRON CC! lE:, 

1750 Monadnock Block, Chicago, IIl. 
JOHNAESCOWING.@. E. 

423 Citizens Bldg., Cleveland, oO. 
CONVERSE BRIDGE CO., 

Chattanooga, Tenn. 
F. CODMAN FORD, 

306 Baronne St., New Orleans, La. 
GUARANTEE CEMENT & STONE CO., 


N. Y. Life Bldg., Minneapolis, Minn. 


KANSAS CITY BRIDGE CO 


1109-1111 McGee St., Kansas City, Mo. 


tape CROWE: & CO; 

222-223 Globe Bldg., Seattle, Wash. 
JOHN B. LEONARD, @e.B 

608 Crossley Bldg., San Francisco, Cal. 
EARNSHAW BRADLEY, ey. Jae, 


3 Place D’Armes Hill, Montreal, Que. 



















EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE PROOFING 











‘TABEEREOHeECON TEN ES 


Page. 
PNET OCMUGETON sirens wc. 0.4 0-3slsiewe ais ate boners React asin a is.ca trate ene Toisvaten ote tecumelsfehip s sanre al sveneveaea ane raters 4-10 
Gold Medal! PAW isco oc.c cescso cS eee eT Totes otecnirere Noctelte ray, cobssielia) ele\ choice evereatctone aieteten alte TL 
Old Style *Corrucated. Barge sc. cra epimers isle chai okeushatel eta crstanh tata eleteete) yc siloteconstal eae niane 12 
Ne We Style COPrPUsated “Bars aerate peietete rete ee teres etarotsn foresee ele reicustans sen eee) treioteloge 13 
Ploor” System “NOs osx sa. fis orto Ries tene alee eeiere tne eieie) cretion, 6 nya are comets enetere 14 
Mioor System NO w Ais echoes creoreteaee tet ereie oe sucisaalaiete ke ee ebe Whereis ere cchoudivns ec sncencinatate nee 15 
Bloor. ‘System eNO. bic wees aa tebe Te es SC Re tee ere eae orca ere sole eae eS 16 
FNOOTRSYStenVeIN OFG wtp a esate ree ce Ree rane era tie tsa tee as eee 17-19 
Carleton (BulldingyRetaininia Wigley e occ aire te oe once etait s.c ase, a oe 20-21 
interborough “POWeEr UELOUSE facie Gers Meus sis ete cme meter eericcilieta se oiatiake) sieve, cious Semen ooerere 22 
Wall Street Pixchamee > Buildin com a c-. << 2 scuateitebe enc titebctsaetectiene carstarcG che chute ainclene 23 
Single FPOOtINES <.iiae eh staacdte e Sick a eee ce a a ade ARI OrE Re eee ean Male scas, @ sire Mayethe 24-25 
DOUDILS WE OOTIMES we ora wie ti Rie roan e ae arene TE eee eae eo ees sha fers 26-27 
Stock: Blovsem Walls tex sotepcetas fr cratame ectke se ieee oe ete ete arena ee De A EE 28-29 
Rétainines. Wallss. snc ce caer ceeersts crem heures orca dearer Gress MTech Sielti CN ares ait os a Sina 30-33 
ICI? > COyISERUCELON ie sic ene ace o cochs tote e oe ros (Clee chai arene RCE ENE TONG ane ea tas ts Shara atic lots Sales oe 34-35 
Conduit, “Dells Rios, exes foc aa so rec crate Mieratetialbel oteteetentets toetetena nade fevers Sieratarciereas. s) Nicaea stele rare 36-37 
New Orleans, Drainage 1 Ca rial. circiciclcretente ities RO Ie te ered Pee ean ts erent sits tomar ence 38-41 
Merminal Railway” SSW. Neat elctcercry wieherere te onde lo Memo lonetsiee tee erataies Ren eL sefed oie afar rch anes 42-43 
Brooklyaas SG WEPSy nares ie acne ascetic ers halaoteve eer oun 4i order shan c heme so mena ene nacho aloy oeatersnatete eMene oN 44-47 
Main: Outlete Sewers Kansas. City: as c.cleyatorstns teen crores dcorst cue oisiemec mente ot ata by ee ieee foes ea euemn 48 
River des se Gres® Sewers acnicaree eee cee eee ea eee Peis Sit etch hap avsne toha nite wioxcas aces 49 
Metropolitar sliunimel seisconsnis Clive. cisentaarsctte cine ia ieee Ene ee ee 50-51 
BOSTOME ‘SUP Wa yews atoveys lors Seo nie erotersc oho ele foe e viiens fle te eeeena aie a tt eee te 52-53 
Grain: TINS sch ethan a headin ote mae tar cave aisrare tt cae Oates vets Sus: Scans SEER EE eee ae 54 
Galveston sSGa SW. 5 aolteerahomiete sts eietaiets.a srevsys akeke Grice I tin tt. aie 55-57 
Reservoir, ake Goneva Wisi ci wisars ct wcisde is ccleuseit erates ache ane eee 58-59 
Ambursen Dan” ConsStrucioritrm ecco. «cision costes seen eee eee 60-61 
Waiter ‘Tower, Hast Orange: Noe Joa) sae dencis.c a cece ee eee 62-63 














Reser Vy Olas tee On Ty aN ape li peapene tone clic Sex ies outs’ o.lkas sus eo NP RCM CR GTI asta) wel as 





Arch with Hollow Abutments...... 
Highway Bridge EFloor Construction. .<...a.5.. «aos oes i OCS AS Ce POR Oe tec 68-69 
Hishwayeoulverts,, NiariOn MGOUN UyeeeLD Cares ts aie torre ie eaielotene/ ese eteye esate 70-73 
Ornamental Reinforced Concrete Balustrade for Plate Girder Bridge.......... 74-75 
Puch way -Culyvery aol he Een d LIiGoes ststemeisdie nts osharegetatatoeedeliete tow total erelsiovel s.tlaianecs 76-77 
Mekinicy™ Srideens HOTESt. Panic’ vanacie wnt! co ce Pate ci ctmenale ms tarethereca ereiere nin el eseldiers ene 78-79 
Secleva Streche Bdge s DLOOKLY ii cre sclemttars «erates ct ahs 21 eR OIE eaters tae anette 80-83 
SemiscircularyCulvertaevwabash: Railroad <.ck om... compete eine citar oihec da aie 84-85 
Eolow cA DUutmentes Wabasha “Railroad aes wat tae al e.telembent eememeniore catate cpc.s aye cree talons 86-87 
Mane rive: Bridzen WMOres te Pat hee sc clet clare we Ries ovat Renee meee ae ea coh orotic as Mee coees 88-89 
iste LODs Culverts mVVial Das Lee EVeullT Onc. ce cule chereee nie terel cere menue seeded cienes a. a lenereraien atic aye 90-91 
Sold BE 1OOrY COnsStriGeron: ain asics cis + one 9.5.1 shen RAMOS Cle NE Sieve cus e re Qieepesnihel s cusleretes ete 92-93 
Clear Branch ulyertOrambe Oo Glen ER’ Y: «. <tavelae cinckave metentmetsnenn << -ieie es a aie falta ote voce 94-95 
Plano Arche Ge websee Sew COS O EUCY. «scikeis cis. 010 Sete On tee ee Oe nh heen 96-97 
CTV Ertan s Ca Vee SoS Ca MP ERY as ioe Voie i, vive: a “ete ae tena Re ee teenie tac eek ic ckatere -oepe nal a eeteye 98-99 
CUT VSS AE Ee OO GETING: EO Rae C che taice colic vocai.exco Ge oa aie eee te etre oe el Pes Locha te. Molla yaerarararetele tof 100-101 
A TChesrong ake Shore. Re Boiys ose wale csee oie crew eshte teei a Liev. Guaile levels cane eo iueta ene 102-106 
Approach Arehess Thebes? IBTIdSe ss. sie/5 seis sia: oe crs sie enetone Ee AAS Gren pit oie 107 
NG Gl aXe speed ne MG 8 Be eed CR ay RRR RR EPCRA ORC EST Ry ore 7, Ciao lene Sar lets es) A ch RacR ae Pan gr A REE 108-109 
RECtAM Si aes Cain A ISCITSSLOT ctapare ctesevevecaharehs le Values Pas eanmniaee eee ee erere ede role ite che te ashe as 110-119 
IMO rVe Tt TAD LGS ie cro reytogete ayes. Mio: boars age, a al ale a oa heTel al Fao ae AACR eis a. ia taste Ie Sr tay oe eu cteinev eae, aren 120 
Mable vier Spacing. OF sCOPTULa Ted © SATS ca. cre celaei sive ais ere toiaieee eieeivitete ware etn eituses 121 
Massachusetts Institute Tests on Bond of Different Bars..................... 122-123 
Migeram: Of Conarony strate ht. line Ieam, MOrmul asics aeeeas else reas 12¢ 
HOOP A Patel DISCUSSTO Mares asi. 3.:5-5iS ootens steceale Seta e aioumten mete ieyitcas conto hale aire, ene visemes 425 
Taples Of sStVen Sth OLOHLOON Panelericcs epormeetaieun cers tiate ce esse eer in oneness 126-131 
Tablestor Désiznines ruichiway (Culverts: sree wbssicle chia tee. s+ cuties sfepeesiMte, suo cucy octets 132-133 
Mes, Beamy -DiSCUSStO mM mate.« «oo ctecte pudletmbsnckdisiet tetas eecmen sits foe weetc amare it x Grae aah scale ta a 1384-142 
Taple for Designing hee: Bea miei wcities Bg cia ton oe ayasate Otereceue shactemorellelets, © sbvae 143 
SHEA! HOS CUSSIO Tiel corebetet nl cadinse oh erates caste neactered de eieyal ds eee a eabvalnie ta Ke Sialla) > tan ate mae veaenee aay 144-145 
Photographs of Tests of Full-sized Beams at Rose Polytechnic.............. 146-157 
Maest<at Brooklyn NAVY MAYO dc cm ve aineieie Wore aero erste) sine elalcisvatiais dis if olen tees 158 
TS SEMO Las VVOF Hoe chee steia: othe tel Mee lcvetate Orolo re, ie e ake ere Oe caesar TP Pras ee tte uta aaneee 159-167 























INTRODUCTION 


The year 1904, just closed, has seen many advances in the field of rein- 
forced concrete construction in general, and in corrugated bars in particular, 
which the following pages will serve to indicate. 

We have patented a new type of corrugated bar, one having a constant cross 
section, shown on page 13, but will continue to manufacture the old style bar, as, 
although this bar has some material not available for strength, there are oc- 
casions when it will better serve the purpose than the latter type. Both bars 
are now manufactured in soft, medium or high carbon steel. 

In the general field of reinforced concrete the predictions which we have 
been making for several years are now being verified. These relate to the advan- 
tage of a high elastic limit, and the advisability of a mechanical bond. 

















ST.LOUIS “@j 
EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING (} 

ce. 





ELASTIC LIMIT.—There has been a great deal of discussion as to the re- 
liability of Considére’s conclusions as to the ability of concrete to stretch without 
rupture ten or fifteen times as much when reinforced with metal as when 
unreinforced, and there is certainly reason to suspect that his results are incor- 
rect, at least not true in all cases. Concretes will vary in stretchability, depending 
upon the materials used, and upon their wet or dry condition. Dry concrete is 
brash, much like dry timber, and laboratory results on bone-dry specimens would 
not be representative of open-air structures. Certainly the metal acts as an 
integrator, enabling us to obtain at all sections the maximum stretch of which 
each section is capable, instead of, at all sections, only that of which the weakest 
section is capable. This will give a proportionate elongation, according to the 
latest investigations, of from .0004 to .0005, equivalent to a stress in the metal 
of from 12,000 to 15,000 pounds per square inch. 

All of this analysis, however, is really beside the mark. A stress in the im- 
bedded metal of 50,000 pounds, if inside the elastic limit, can result in no harm 
to structures reinforced with such a material as the corrugated bar. In such 
a case, even if the cracks were as far apart as six inches, they would only have 
a width of .o1” and, at a depth of two or three inches below the surface, even 
if this crack extended clear down to the bar, as it might do if plain bars were 
used, it is doubtful if the mild acidity of the carbonic acid in the air could cor- 














rode the metal between two such strongly alkaline surfaces only .o1” apart. 
However this may be with the plain bar, it is certain that the crack could not 
extend down to the surface of a corrugated bar, as this would involve a slip 
along the bar, which would necessitate the shearing off of the concrete entering 
the recesses on the bar’s surface, a condition only to be obtained with the de- 
molition of the structure. 

The true function of the metal therefore is not to prevent cracks, but to sub- 
divide a given stretch into a great many cracks. If this is done, and a corrugated 
bar used, it is of no consequence when the cracking first begins, nor what the 
stress in the metal reinforcement is, so long as it is inside the elastic limit, be 
that limit however high. 

Inside the elastic limit, then, we have no damage. Beyond this limit, how- 
ever, we encounter cracks of very large extent, which would soon result in the 
collapse of the structure. Therefore, in our judgment, the factor of safety for 
reinforced concrete should be based upon the capacity at the elastic limit of the 
metal reinforcement, and should be, generally speaking, not less than four. 

The building laws of many cities which now allow a working stress in the 
metal reinforcement of 16,000 pounds per square inch, whatever kind of metal 
it may be, even though it has an elastic limit of not over 30,000 pounds per 
square inch, are examples of reckless disregard of the public safety. 




















| 


\ EXPANDED METAL} 






ST. LOUIS « 
' 
FIRE Joos () 














If, therefore, we are safe inside any reasonable elastic limit, and our working 
stress is this limit divided by our factor of safety, which should be not less 
than four, then it is wise and economical to have as high an elastic limit as 
possible consistent with such ductility as may be required by the work in hand. 
Generally little ductility is needed, but in some cases where much cold bending 
has to be done, medium, or even soft steel might be required, and all three 
grades we are prepared to furnish. 

MECHANICAL BOND.—There are three influences affecting the adhesion 
of cement to a metal surface, as follows: 

1°. Breuillié, at La Chainette, reported some investigations in Annals des 
Ponts et Chaussées for 1900, which showed that soaking in water for nine 
months reduced the adhesion of concrete to metal from one-half to two-thirds. 

2°. Prof. Schule, who now occupies the position at Zurich formerly held 
by Prof. Bauschinger, reported at the International Engineering Congress at 
St. Louis in October, 1904, that when the reinforcing bars were stressed, even 
though inside the elastic limit, the cross section was slightly reduced. Inasmuch 
as the adhesion consists, simply, in the entering by the cement particles into 
microscopical pores on the surface of the metal, any shrinkage of the cross 
section of the metal, however slight, was sufficient to materially affect the value 
of this adhesion. 


























° 


ane 


In our experience we have had cases of rupture of the adhesion with 
plain bars after eight years’ use, where the structure was not wet, nor did the 
stress in the bars ordinarily amount to much, this failure being due entirely to 
vibrations and shocks. 

In open-air structures all three of these influences will generally be found 
working at the same time. Starting with 500 pounds per square inch adhesion, 
suppose only one-half this is lost by being wet much of the time, this leaves 
250 pounds. If one-half of this is lost by shrinkage of the cross section of the 
metal, due to stress in same, we then have only 125 pounds. Taking a factor 
of safety of four, and making no allowance whatever for vibrations and shocks, 
which alone are sometimes sufficient to destroy the whole of the adhesion, we 
have an allowable working stress for adhesion of 30 pounds per square inch. 
For a rod of 1” diameter this means about 1200 pounds per lineal foot, which, 
to develop a working stress in the metal of 12,000 pounds per square inch, would 
require an anchorage of ten feet in which no other increment could be added! 
Such a requirement in practice would be absurd and impossible, generally 
speaking. 

That foreign engineers, who have been mainly responsible for the use of 
plain bars for concrete reinforcement, are coming to realize the unreliability of 
adhesion alone, is indicated in many ways, chief of which is that the specifica- 















ST, LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (} 
Co. 














tions prepared about a year ago, covering all this kind of work in the German 
Empire, state that “the bond shall, so far-as possible, be of a mechanical nature.” 
Up to that time there had been practically nothing used but plain bars. Further, 
it is noticeable that most of the French companies are now turning up their 
rods at the end or using some similar device, though what advantage is to be 
gained by turning up a three-quarter inch rod sixteen feet long an inch or two 
at the end, it is hard to realize. 

Foreign engineers, as a matter of fact, have not had the experience that we 
have. Their beam work, in which alone these weaknesses develop, dates back 
only eight or nine years, while in the United States we have been building beams 
almost continuously since 1875. As it has taken eight years for this weakness 
to develop in some of our own work, and as abroad they first used mortar in- 
stead of concrete, which gives a stronger adhesion, it may be said that the 
time is only just arriving when we might expect them to discover the necessity 
of using other means of obtaining a reliable bond. And as before stated, these 
expectations are now realized. 

When the unreliability of the adhesion is admitted, then it becomes neces- 
sary to have a mechanical bond that will avoid all splitting tendency on the 
concrete. This requires, with mathematical certainty, that the side of the ribs 
on the bar shall not vary from a plane at right angles to the axis of same by 


























an amount greater than the angle of friction between the concrete and metal, 
which is, generally speaking, about 45°. The corrugated bar is the only one in 
the market that fulfills, or that can ever fulfill, this condition, as our patent 
covers all bars that can be rolled in which the condition is complied with. 


Summing up the situation, the corrugated bar has the following vital points 
of advantage over plain bars, and over all other types of bar reinforcement: 


° 


1°. Its elastic limit being high (unless by special requirement) enables a 
higher working stress to be used than should be used for soft steel bars, taking, 
therefore, proportionately less metal. 


° 


2°. Cracks in the concrete can not penetrate to the corrugated bar so long 
as the stress in the steel is inside the elastic limit. 


° 


3°. Soaking in water concrete reinforced with corrugated bars does not 
injure their bond. 


° 


4°. Reduction of the cross section of these bars, due to tension stress inside 
the elastic limit, in no way reduces their effective grip on the concrete. 

5°. Vibrations and shocks do not impair their bonding value. 

6°. Being formed by rolls while hot, the bars are all alike, the shape of each 
piece not depending upon the personal equation of some workman. 





10 











& HE CORRUGATEDESTEEL. BAR} ¢ 


WAS AWARDED THE 


GOLD MEDAL 


BY THE SUPERIOR JURY 


LOUISIANA PURCHASE EXPOSITION 





SeeeLOWISHEX PANDEDSME DATS FIREPROOEKING- CO. 


CENTURY BUILDING GENERAL AGENTS Sle LOUIS Ua S.A. 





‘parinbed Sst ABM JOYA %G Jo JYUSIOM UL UGTPVIIBA W 
‘sueq poyesnis0H 2xAIS PIO 
Ww dod el! 00°F JUSIOM £,O)0'T UOI0es JON “weg o,AT 





‘WJ tod “sql 01°% WUSIOAA {,D0L'0 UOTOeg JON “AVG O,,T 





‘WJ tod “sq] 96° JUSIOM ‘0990 UOT}O8g JON “weqGo,% 





AG 


‘J Jod ‘Sd Ge'T 1USIOM {,028°0 UOT}OES JON “avg 0,,% 





‘WJ dod ‘sql 790 JUSIOM {,O8T'0 UOT}OVg ION “WHA, 





————— 


F 





@ ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 


12 


‘paiinbet st AVM J9yIIO0 %e Jo JYSIOM Ul UOTVeLIeA ¥ 
‘SsIeq poyesni10pD s[AIS MON 













3” sit. LOUIS’. 
| EXPANDED METAL) 
) FIRE ous 


see pages 128 and 131—Suitable for spans up to 


System No. 3.—Flat Slab Floor—For designing tabies, 


sixteen feet. 
14 






\Y ST.LOUIS “@; 
EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING (| 

Co. 








System No. 4.—Expanded Metal Flat Slab—For designing tables, see pages 126, 127, 129 and 130— 
Suitable for spans up to eight feet. 18 





ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
CoO. 





System No, 5.—Expanded Metal Flat Arch—Suitable for spans up to ten feet—No tie rods necessary. 
16 





System No. 6.—Long Span Tee System Using Corrugated Bars in the Ribs and Expanded Metal in the 
Flat Slab. For designing table in good rock concrete, see page 148. 


17 






FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 













Nore Loaded area, (6-84 °K 4-3 
Jotal loza_ ¢2Z000 “as, 

equal 40 G00 (bs per 3g fr 
Deflection of rb, g” 


More Portion of floor fo left 
of C-D was nor built 


hen test was made 
















Mote. These bars. 
cach beam hooked 
over (8° £- beams 


= Corrugated Bars | & S- Zz Corrugated Gars 
” 


. | , ” 
x 4-23 
| 7’ I-b0am -/5F 7 4 aro = grader 
TRANSVERSE SECTION A-B a a a A A A! 


howe eie! 


‘ Dll St PLM HALES 7 
—— ee Tr 
CORRUGATED BAR 








/6’-Sg" 














ht A 











Bottom of Aaunch around rie beam 


Is 


LONGITUDINAL SECTION C-D 


System No. 6.—Tee Floor—IFor designing table, see page 143. 


18 










ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
ce. 

















Test on System No. 6, as shown on page 18. Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 6 weeks. Load 600 pounds per 
square foot. Deflection at center of rib 1%”. 
19 


aIsuq ‘Nolleporig “yu ‘tf 
"@Q-49-98 -SQ-4e-¢9 ON SONILG@H NWAT105 


< or-,Sz é 


6 Alic~——— = vYe-9i ~ Ce) > 
DNON .9-,S% Sid,8 SUVA HI ee 






























A zg 
Eee 
PRR eh aiocy beat Sig. 78 
a Nwaky7 \H pple bag ht a; suv +4 
” em Wows, 
ch Ni ed) mate 
a=. 
leone 
Vv a (ist 
yak HOVa NI ZS S129 Suva mI Suarvr Zz ' ¥ 
0 
” 
Zz 
4 
iu 
A 
° | 
7 
A : 
0 i 
- | 
¢ 
zt 
Z 
G 
re 
J 
oO 
¢ ow 
is 
9 or 
SLOALINDUY CLI ZI SUVS Y% iu 3 
NaAaQuvD ¥ WNWASSNYy NVUNVW i f % 
S WANA) 2S be 
ONICTIAG NOLAN /0 
7 
‘OW ILOOd qe 
ONY 0 
TIVWM NOILYWANAOA Fe 
=a © {Z 
SAD Zi SUVE Bf Ht 
IGN Loe iS : 


‘N 


9 
z 
7 
o 
=) 
fe 
Pa 


S) 


FIRE 





20 


Carleton Building—Completed Retaining Wall. 
21 











ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 











‘suOT]epUNOY sUISUG, UI pesn sive 
isu ‘jSuOD pue “oo, ‘MOOTA UPA “VY 
Sich lon AMOI etSPNC@R ach ile aS 
yYIOX MON “U “YW PsuvlL pidey ‘esnoy, JOMOd Ysno10q19j,Uy 





ph, PERL ARRAS RE ITY eA 
EO es See car een acen seer amen 




















co. 


PROOFING 


ST. LOUIS ~@g 
EXPANDED METAL 


FIRE 


‘oinssoid 19}e@M paieMdn jstse1 0} JOOY AB[[eo UI paesn sie 
‘Ig9ULSUG JOIUD ‘ApDInNg “AK UopAION 
‘s1]U0D “OD 3 1elINw “Vy “095 ‘STyoO1y ‘TTessny 32 uo TTD 
‘yIOX MON ‘SUIP[ING oSsuBvYyOXM 39 TIPAA PU} ST SUIplINd [[e} oyL 








at 


mr) oo 





s ra co Be mm i) 





EIRENE 3 


4 

















ST. 
EXPANDED METAL/| 
) FIRE PROOFING 





200 TONS. 
200 TONS. 


SINGLE FOOTINGS. | 









BASEMENT FLOOR. 
: ge 


CORRUGATED BAR FOOTING. 
PLAIN CONCRETE FOOTING. 


, Comparison between Plain and Reinforced Single Footings. 


24 





Y_ ST.LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE corre 





— 








COMPARISONS OPZCOS EO beshNGERE LOO LENGS 
PLAIN CONCRETE FOOTING 





PiseayatlOmel des cUuAyCS:. (Cs SOC te. WN tet PR ea os. 2 $ 5.75 
Goncretes OCs Ciel aCe 2OCs re An «get nis Oe RO ols nea 07 41.00 
ROSA oS Sn eae eC gS oe a An $46.75 
CORRUGATED BAR FOOTING 
BxcavaliOnse 7yoeClis Wols.p (CD) SOC; oo. eee nt Ser eae et sh aenegile 
CGncretesn lO se Ciieeltme 20. cls id each, Seen ad Me Certs SNe ss cc 20.40 
COE ieatedanatce 2520) DS57(0) 36a) cmmeueee see Ges ua es 11.46 
Pert aecoliniiglenet uo ss DS: (@) 2. C-eemnan cars eo Someta ae 2.98 
SE ba ee ened attest h ere os tte MME MS wns Ras Se 38s $38.59 


This shows that even in single piers a distinct saving is made 
by the reinforced concrete design. The percentage of saving increases 
with the size of the footing. 

The chief recommendation of this construction, however, lies not 
so much in the decreased cost as in the greatly increased reliability. 
The plain footing depends upon the tensile strength of the concrete 
to give the required spread. No more unreliable factor of strength 
exists in the whole realm of building materials. In the corrugated bar 
design, even if the tensile strength of the concrete were zero, the 
strength of the footing would not be materially altered. 








25 




























Heater Wire 24 Mee TTF C1. COL C 
' ' ; ais: a 
oN: 4 ead 
rT ipt A i 
are 
ee 
eck 

W--- 4 -- + 

CORRUGATED: BAR DESIGN STEEL: I+ BEAM: DESIGN 


DOUBLE: FOQTING 







he 
‘ 


' 
- 
1 


k---5'2>--4 
ie it 
{res 








SS oa 
SECTION. N.N. SECTION-N.N. 


Comparison between Corrugated Bar and I Beam Double Footings. 
Corrugated Bar Design used for the Norvell-Shapleigh Building, St. Louis. 
Weber & Groves, Archts. 


26 





YY ST.LOUIS 






EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
Co. l 














DOUBLE OR COMBINED FOOTINGS 


On the foregoing page is shown a comparison between a Corrugated Bar and an 
I Beam footing, of equal strength, for two columns. The column to the left carries 358 
tons, the other 222 tons. The area of the footing is 232 square feet, making an average 
pressure of 2.5 tons per square foot. The center of gravity of footing does not coincide 
with the resultant of the loads, resulting in a variation in soil pressure, which can be 
obtained by Hooke’s law for beams i where f is the increase or decrease in 
pressure in tons per square foot at the edge of the footing; y, the distance in feet 
from the edge in question to the center of gravity of footing; M is the revolving 
moment in foot tons around this center of gravity; and I is the moment of inertia of 
the footing plan in feet. In the case shown, I=7565. M=580x0.42—243.5 foot tons. 
From the small end to the center of gravity is 12.92, This gives f,=0.42 tons per 
square foot. In the same way fo: is found to be 0.27 tons per square foot. Hence under 
one edge we have a pressure of 2.77 tons per square foot and under the other 2.08. 

The maximum bending moment occurs at the point of zero shear and is 22,800,000 
inch pounds for a width of 11.77 feet. Taking a factor of safety of four, we have an 
ultimate moment for a width of 1’ of 7,760,000 inch pounds. From formulae on page 
88, for average concrete, this gives a_ thickness of concrete of 45”, and 34% square 
inches of metal per foot of width=6, %” corrugated bars. 

For the I-beam footing, the moment of 1,900,000 foot pounds requires 8, 24”—80-Ib. 
beams. 


COMPARISON OF COST. 








Corrugated Bar Footing. 1-Beam Footing. 

: ion. 3 . yds., @ 50c....$ 19.50 Excavation, 45 cu. yds., @ 50c....$ 22.50 
EAE aed @ Ca Rea Conerete, 966 cu. ft., @ 20c........ 193.20 
Bars, 4,106 Ibs., @ 3C.......00.00s 123.18 Steel beams, 16,660 lbs.. @ 2%4c.... 416.50 

pz: a Bolts and sep’s, 1,120 lbs., @ 2c.. 22.40 
AMO PM cacao 4 MohotmeoeOGoOCAbeOnE $316.68 AMOUEN Gooch taGagenann stonone aes $654.60 











27 








‘ashotyyyooig jo site‘ Jo uonNoes oy: 
“taSCUL “AM IN ‘UOSUIqOY ‘OD “f£ “0D JUSWIOD puYvp4sog smno’y 1g 





“Suva SNONNILNOD 0 8% - eH, oe 





% ‘Nid'Wwwid %% aod 
SIABID HLIM "S42 NO OL 
AWIAI GOH WIC %|—T 

mM 2B, 


































































































z 
° 
a 3 
o 2 
> o 
a = > 
te < > 2» 
m =a" ae 
av z 2 x 
Min a wo a 
o o > o ie 
Not, > a ©5 
a a o re 
J 
2 4 1 |X 2 
o. | a 
e, i 7 
~ _ 
eh Of, | Ss o 
o!l 2 
Zo 3 
°,* “31y9¢6 ~~ 
> 
{ SS PE ee i a TT YT r 
i o,| 
} 
| 
| }w 
a 
=< 
I 3 | 
ie} : 
2 Sale 
> 
@ » a 
> rw oO 
a x 
°, ey 
x < ae pS r = 
al x | a oe 
ty = ; 
Bie a im 2 
ie} ed > oO! ri 
> 
zo 5 ieaalecs ~ oo | 
ay 2 jl iat 
3 x Paha ity 
a | 1a ‘a 
a> on it 
of a 
= °. 
{ : 
9° tet 
4 1 lew 
‘L3SdQ SON] | Ks 
Y31LN32 01 9-01 saoy ie toed 
SHLON31 2 NI SONINIOP Lv SLNN BARRIS { H 
434N39 01 9-01 “GHLONI7 9 ‘'H391N32 OL i | 
“STINNWHD'LNOD 21 Saou ‘Wrid AY 97,01 SQ0YU wWyid %O | 
x = 
1 oath el 
tf a a ss a SE 


28 










Y__ ST.LOUIS “®g 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
co. ) 









St. Louis Portland Cement Co. Stockhouse, During Construction. 
29 


‘pepessu sjzurof uotTsuedx9 ON 
‘uOISSaIdeqd JO UOI{BAS[A YORLL 1OJ [TRA SuLureyory 





} S1LD.Zl SUVA “UXOD % 
' CLO,S Suva “Uxoo .% 





\ 12,@ GNV USIHL,el XY 
\ __ uy sasstutina-TON 


ipa ee : 














1 

! 
ee x 

fa) 

py Salo er 
Make os 32 
4A 
eg Sl a ag 
\ : 

G a XN 
> uU 
yA — 
UN 
Bf fe 
abe 
JH ! 
Ji! 
| aie 

{ 

i) 
Ss, 
fay 
re) 
N 
A 
8 
y 
------ 5) 
lu 
N, 
fa} 
4 
u 

! 
ery. 









NOLLWAANS HOWL 
HO3 ive 40 USVA 






30 








CONTENU O Coe \Vauleles 


One of the great advantages of reinforced concrete is in our ability 
to dispense with expansion joints in long structures. These may be built 
with the material in one piece from end to end, a mile long if desired, 
and by a properly proportioned longitudinal metal reinforcement, shrink- 
age and temperature cracks can be entirely obviated. 

Most engineers have to be shown; and they will not believe it then 
unless they can see some scientific explanation of the matter. That ex- 
planation is as follows: 

It has been shown by Considére, Hatt, and others, that concrete, 
when reinforced with metal well disseminated in small areas, will ap- 
parently stretch about ten times as much as when no metal is present, 
and that it will submit to proportionate elongations of about .oors. 
The co-efficient of expansion of concrete being .0000055, we find that 
it would take a fall of 270° to develop a proportionate shortening equal 
to the wall’s ability to stretch. The wall will pull out in this manner 
at about three-fourths its full tensile strength, or say at 150 pounds per 
square inch. 

The quantity of metal needed is enough to equal the tensile strength 
of the wall at an elongation of .oor5, corresponding to a stress per 
square inch in the metal of 45,000 pounds. The area of metal would 











‘M “H 
‘pur ‘A]UNOg UOTE ‘TEAL Sutupeyoy Jo uoloog 


Cigar mn) = 


‘“IoAVAING AjUNOD ‘UUGIUSNeLS 










92.21SHVE YYO2,2/>, 






<— SURFACE OF GROUNO 


J REORR. BARS 2'0"CC 
WRCORR BARS 12°CC i 





me 
2 a6, ayo ———— re wf 
ai ; ' pate 





ORR BARS 12°CC 


/2,C ORR. BARS ]2°CC. 


—- +e ew 


NA Y%'CORR BARS 12°CC. 


32 


ea ee Sa ees j 
: 
j 


























~ ST.LOUIS “@g 

\EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 
Ce 








Retaining Wall, Marion County, Ind. 















“| EXPANDED METAL/| 
) FIRE PROOFING 




















| 

\ 

1 

| 
Vitefar si. * 





r i Y LEE; 
| | 4 ~ és 4 Yi == 


<Eerve 2opfosmotety » cycled 









Yoong $220 
| (0 s00rw between ag 


: f . i| y 3 LBs Z SY tty 
ra SS Spa ZZ 3 yy 
> 

























L SS | eae fe — = 2 -— Le CQ Wy 


ELEVATION OF Pié Bi Ie ro ie ea tare 
phi PIER GENERAL SECTION OF RECEIVING CHAMBER 


SECTION B-B 
St. Louis Water Department—-Section of Weirs. 


B. C. Adkins, Water Commissioner. 
E. E. Wall, Prin. Asst. Engr. 


34 


St. Louis Water Department—Weirs 
35 





under Construction. 












ST. LOUIS “@; 

EXPANDED METAL} 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
ce. 














ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL/} 

FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 


\ 









| 

| 

* ' 
“ 

[itt 

| 

| 

| 

| 

| 


\ 

' 

| 

| 
a5 aE. 


k—-——/+//— - ~-3€-—----— 
Cross Section of Conduit at Del Rio, Texas. J. W. Maxcy, Engineer. 


36 





37 









ST. LOUIS “@j 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
ce. 





Del Rio Conduit under Construction, 






ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 











Section of New Orleans Drainage Canal. Maj. B. M. Harrod, Chief Engineer. 
38 





New Orleans Drainage Canal, Showing Test. 
inforcement 1%” oO 


6 feet apart. 





ST. LOUIS “gy 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
Co. 


Gravel Concrete 1:3:6; span 13’; slab 11%” thick; re- 
corrugated bars, 4%” ects.; load 51150 pounds on two 8”x8” supports in center, 
Deflection scarcely appreciable. 


39 














OES st. Louis 

{ EXPANDED METAL 
()) FIRE PROOFING 
\ C9. 





BATTER 6b" PER Foot 


“a - ed ee: eS ee Pisvere Sa ° ° os Be lot . P 
aS ee 
Sa, 


Se 








ee a 
= $< — 
Last Type of New Orleans Drainage Canal. 


40 





4 
j 
a 
* 
ri 


Last 


Type of New Orleans 











Drainage Canal under Construction. 
41 


















3 Eglo phy) 


Weenider 77 7777 ZZ 


a) 














SS 


Ss 


=e 


NAA OMOMHOOKONV 









SSS SEAN 


\ ». % aN x * \ 1 
8 2 g\.\ 
——— ys = is 





SA ASSBASS 


SAE en 








—— — = 


\ \ 
\ \ \ 
—————— 













—— 
















Hi Al 
a | 
Wy 
| | A 
vb 
i 





nS Ole 














St. Louis Terminal Railway Association—Section of Sewer under Baggage Floor. 
J. L. Armstrong, Engr. M. of W. ne A. P. Greensfelder, Asst. Engr. 





AIRE PROOFING 
Ce. 


SEWER CONSTN EXPRESS BLDes 
: FEB-2-190uL- 


Louis Terminal Railroad Association—Meeting Point of Two Branches of Sewer. 


43 









































CONCRETE 


Rig eens ay: 
N 2°, 











9.0%, 
oa 


og2 ee 


34 CORRUGATED STEEL RODS, 12° CTO CS 





= = 
AQVZGRIE Ao 
seal 


FieOAse 
fa tat 

















SECTION MAIN OUTLET, SEWER BRO@KLYN NEW YoRH. 


H. Asserson, Chf. Engr. 


R. 


44 





y 








PROOFING 


EXPANDED META 
Co. 





| FIRE 


YY ST.LOUIS 











Main Outlet Sewer. Brooklyn, during Construction. 


45 






ON GRILLAGE. 






R. H. Asserson, Chf. Engr. 


46 








EXPANDED METALS 





‘YY ST.LOUIS 


i 


Co. 


PROOFING 


FIRE 





JaMIg uUATYOOIG Jo sodA, z9ayJoUWy 








47 







C9 
‘Yof STAGGERED 


Ar fey 9. ca 
| ROWS|\2' LONG \ 





~~ 


~ 


Proposed Section of Main Outlet Sewer, Kansas City, Mo. D. W. Pike, City Engineer. 
48 


GRADE, 










7@ 0 CORR. BARSX 
4" Crs. 





¥ 
o 
eS 
: 
iv 
c 
| oO 
re) 
Lo 


Ye 








Proposed River des Péres Sewer through Catlin Tract. 


49 











Julius Pitzman, Engineer. 


\ EXPANDED METAL? 
| FIRE PROOFING 
Ce. 













“S ST. LOUIS: 
EXPANDED METAL || 
!) FIRE PROOFING | 











R__ BARS 4’crs. 
es 






















% CORR BARS 2'cTS. 
1 


: oe 
CORR BARS Sh'cTs 





ee ee A ee cs oe hb 4) 






oe beer esa 























> Wes 
















21%" O < 
% CORR BARS !2CTS. N 
+ 








2018 3°67 
aati : 


Section of Tunnel and ‘Retaining Wall, Metropolitan Street Railway Co., Kansas City, Mo. 
Ford, Bacon & Davis, Engineers. 


50 





Metropolitan Street Railway Company Tunnel. 
il 











ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL} 

FIRE PROOFING ( 
CO. 





‘yooulSug JoIuD ‘UosIeO “VW PABVMOTT ‘UOISS[wWItWOH Hstivig, pidey uojsog ‘[ouUns, 


“ARROW ANAS ASHES ww 
% 


ot 





Boston Rapid Transit Subway. 





Howard A. Carson, Chief Engineer. 
53 







[ 









ST. LOUIS “@g 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (} 
ce, 



































Metcalf & Metcalf, Engrs. 


Missouri Pacific R. R. Grain Bins at Kansas City. 


54 











ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL» 

FIRE PROOFING ( 
ce. 





{ 





=o 


UDO 





Galveston Sea Wall. Geo. W. Boschke, Engr. of Constr. 


« 


5 





Go ST. LOUIS: 
EXPANDED METAL/] 
FIRE PROOFING 
9. ; 









aS 


a 
Sy 


Galveston Sea Wall during Construction. 
a6 














ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED META 









IRE PROOFING([} 
F Re F Gh 
RA 




















Galveston Sea Wall—Bird’s-eye View. 


57 


















cove Toe SAVE HOD H ri- —A CHW BOD E21 ye thy 
MN ——————E— EE es See 
| S«S«Cua caves go 
/ 
| | 
wy ' 
Po 
| 
fia | | 
Coal | 
‘ | 
! 
t | 
/ I ! 
/ | ‘ 
! 3 
! | | 5 
/ | f 
/ ; ! - 
! i & 
i a 
/ i 
1 | | “ 
f | 
/ ' 
: | 
/ 
! 1 
/ | 
u | 
Uy 
z i} 
/ 
t | 
i | 
! 1 
f 1 
/ 
1 
a oe Re gs eee Se 
(SSO 5 Selina Sen [San ee eee ee ees -t— poses 
Ee ee ee 
































A. C. Warren, Engr. 


Reservoir at Lake Geneva, Wis. 











Photograph of Completed Lake Geneva Reservoir. 
59 


ST. Louis « 

EXPANDED META 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
ce. 


















) 












~ ST. LOUIS 


\EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 






























































109.06 ~ 
yp USS SHY Sp Sf SS 


Reinforced Concrete Dam Across the Battenkill. 
Built for the American Wood Board Co., Schuylerville, N. Y. 
Patented by Ambursen Hydraulic Construction Co., Boston, Mass. 


60 











ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
co, 








Ambursen Dam at Schuylerville under Construction. 
61 


‘sajuopD “op suyooy Y[eVeOMUOWIUIO’Y) 
-ISUy “VISUOD ‘9TNEeUTIIA "OD “OD 
‘fC CN ‘osuvioC ISA 7E SYIOM J9OJVM AOJ AOMOT, 19JVM 








| 
K Ae os ene -,9I--°- Sates - 




















~+e-*99.9 Sawa r/c 


/ 


s+4/e 





Awotaan 29-L 
5D ,0) .2h: 9 D «21.76 96.01 HHI. 























———<—— 





vOOl# 
A Ty LaW a30NWdXd 


. avo. 
\ q 





62 












ST.LOUIS © 

EXPANDED METAI 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
co. y 








oe a 


ee ee 


Photograph of Completed Tower. 





63 







ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 


co = =—— += ~ tpt = 






8 BCCKT BARS ¥4"O" CCH EVA" BA Rol2 


©CC%*7 BARS 7, 


' 
! 
‘ 
' 
t 
' 
‘ 
' 
' 
' 
t 
t 
t 
t 
: 
i] 
AS 
R 
' 
‘ 
‘ 
' 
‘ 
1 
‘ 
‘ 
‘ 
' 
' 
‘ 
' 
‘ 


NBARSYB 





pisses eee Sut st RE 


7% BARS 54% CC.9'LG. 


4-1 BARS 


Section of Reservoir 


-—--- — >t - ~~) -— 5 = Ht --- —- Je 


= SSS SS SSS 


6" THICK . 4-7/8 BARS 5'LG. S" THICK 


Fi td na ed lta ARNE A ded BSE are 
eee ' ' Pe eS ' ' ee ae 


ao = eI Ee 


=~: 


Se a 





rr eS 


Construction, East Orange, N. J. 
C. C. Vermeule, Conslt. Engr. 
Commonwealth Roofing Co., Contrs. 


64 























East Orange Reservoir under Construction. 


65 








: cae 


#. 


SN TRICE RT 


aa 





& 


fast Orange Reservoir under Construction. 


66 











ST, LOUIS 
EXPANDED META 
| FIRE PROOFING ( 











































eee a eee a 
SRR BARS I2 cr] *%e) 














Ps ant 
ae 
¥ ‘ 
roars a>} 
rs 
it 

rae : 

: a iy 

ei ie) 0 < 

roe xe Co) “ea 

“ 7 . x 3 

G7 CORR BARS 6° cTa » 2 

a 


HALF SECTION AT: CROWN < 


40 2'0 














PART SECTION: AS 











Arch with Hollow Abutments. 


67 





Cross Section of Highway Bridge Floor Construction. Designed for Cooper’s Class A specifications. 
Many floors like this have been built. 


68 











ee 














<a) 
= 
a= 
BaSo 
S820 
nee 
= 
—T 


= 
ANAT AN AV AV AVA AV AN AV AV AN AN ANAS 3S) 


Dar {0 stat aATATA®. PALETERMT RTS 





Span 535 feet. 


Metal Floor Construction on Highway EPridge at Waco, Texas. 


Expandcd 





s 
EXPAN 






. LOUIS 


DED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 


” is’ 
' BARS 44.CC. {te LONG oe SS 
EVERY OTHER ONE BENT AS SHOWN« 









2 BARS 6°CC 23 LONG 



























— oS! 

yt 1 BARS 4/2 CC(S LONG EVERY OTHER Si 

ee Qs 

"185+] | ---------------- ------+-------- 20! .--)-------------------- ------- 0 ------ PE 
‘ Oy 

' 3 on 

i Se] ces 

; D1 bO: 

3 i % & 

’ oOo, 

a Ee 

' 1 . 





Y2"BARSG CC 13° LONG 


. Ye BARS 20°CC I7KLONG .. » 


ne 





~71 BARS 5 CC 25'LONG 





1 BARSS’ CC. 18’ LONG 
n D : : : : 


S ELE 41co 








Hate SECTION 


Section of Highway Culvert Construction, Marion Corsini: 
H. W. Klausmann, County Engr. 












ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL} 

FIRE PROOFING ( 
C9. 





gp win PEITTIAIT, 





Completed Culvert, Marion Co., Ind. 
71 









+ EXPANDED METAL 
!\ FIRE PROOFING 
































yz" BARS 6"CC 23"LONG 


* . . _ * * . . _ : 
Fy No Seneeans oc IT’ LONG «| 3] | || [| [| [/ Ea be 5 








BARS 3ie°CC 23 LONG 


Wz BARS 12"°CC 13; LONG 












37a BARS.S "CC 172" LONG 
a 
i 


Te BARS 12°CC 23° LONG 








5 ae ‘ S Na = bie eet SEAR Oe "We - 
le aie 1 Ai BARS 12°C IT’ LONG j % 
ete . ween owe . ey le | i 
HALF SECTION | 


HALF ELEVATION 


Section of Highway Culvert Construction. Marion Coreind: 
H. W. Klausmann, County Engr. 


72 









EXPANDED METAL? 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
CO. 








Completed Culvert, Marion Co., Ind. 


~] 









=o Saxe ['RD-BAR AT EACH STIFE ANGLE 





eae eae | 8 CC 


rah = Ce ee 
ele esc 
o° vyCORR BARS 2' CC EXCEPT 2 BARS ON 

EACH SIDE OF SIDEWALK BRACKET EE 












WHICH WILL BE 3°CC 


_, CORR BARS 12"CC 
Section showing Ornamental Balustrade of Reinforced Concrete Screening Steel Plate Girder, 
Indianapolis, Ind. 
H. W. Klausmann, County Engr. 





2LS 6 X4"X Te 








74 








EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
] co. ) 





Photograph of Water Color Drawing, showing one-half of Completed Plat i idg’ 
mental Balustrade Screen. This Bridge is now under Construction © Scene eS O20 


15 









ST. LOUIS: 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 





10-10" 





Section of Highway Culvert at South Bend, Ind. A. J. Hammond, City Engr. 


76 









EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING ( 
Co. 














Completed Culvert, South Bend, Ind. 
{Wt 


ST. LOU 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 






ees Bek itisidtig seabd cee AES PREREEES TEE SEARED 
ve z Bars: ¢ GCL 2'Bars, 6.106. & 
Section A-B. Section C-D. 





F Bars, 6.106%, a ; : 
BAF B “Bars Lap 64 ih om aati 


4’from 
Face 







River des Péres Arch, Forest Park, St. Louis. R. H. Phillips, Chf. Ener. 


78 








River des Péres Arch—Completed Structure. 
79 














ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL} 

FIRE PROOFING ( 
ce. 

































— = 
op of Arch and len 8 andre! Well eZ, 

é ‘0 be covers i - 
edd ered Wi ‘aterprao 17. Goh 


ary ae o 











18" 











ft te mncmtertaerevenpesnss mers a 50 LTTE. LAL 


| 
| 







Seeley Street Bridge, Brooklyn, N. Y. G. W. Tillson, Chief Engineer; 
kK. J. Fort, Assistant Engineer. 
D. Cuozzo & Bro., Contractors. 


80 








Seeley Street Bridge, Broeklyn, during Construction. 


$1 







fs ST. LOUIS 
4 EXPANDED METAL/) 
FIRE PROOFING 
(9. 














Seeley Street Bridge, Brooklyn, during Construction. 


$2 









| EXPANDED 
FIRE PROOFING ( 





fe Beageanerangngeasncgagcegetayssangatatsaaan teeta teat CATH 





Completed Seeley Street Bridge, Brooklyn. 


83 











foos -4#4 07s 





ee halide oe 
r= S---_-- 2 a -- 





Roos -/2%CTS 


SECTION SHOWING SPACING OF Rods. 





Se ae 


r 








Ww. S. Newhall, Chief Engineer 


Section of Culvert on Wabash Railroad near Carpenter, Ill. 


A. O. Cunningham, Bridge Engineer. 


84 








\f ST. LOUIS 


EXPANDED METAL 


) FIRE PROOFING (} 
F ce. ly 





Wabash Culvert in Process of Construction. 


85 


‘9VULSU OSpliq ‘WeYySsuIuUUND “O “VW 
‘IOOUISUTT JOINO ‘“[TPUMOAN ‘S “M 
TIL ‘OT[9OTUOTT 7B PvorIery YSeqeA UO JUVUIZNaGY JO UoT}Deg 


ievena-----+= 0,81 -2222o=2==-- 


oe EE 22 Pees cts 2 eo hee 





eebtriipe ve astestaederddec 





-G\|---------------- 
wane 





) 


u 


‘4 
OL %% 


‘*Q- 





area a 
oe ns qs: 





A Sage 





86 





Monticello Bridge on Wabash Railroad. Photograph of Back of Abutment. 
87 


Ey st. Louis. 

EXPANDED METAL/| 

!\ FIRE PROOFING } 
\ C9. 
















IS"I BEAN 
45.38 





Wabash Plate Girder Bridge with Reinforced Concrete Floor, Hollow Abutments and Ornamental 
Balustrade, in Forest Park, St. Louis. 
W. S. Newhall, Chf. Engr.; 
ss A. O. Cunningham, Bridge Engr. 

















Completed Wabash Bridge, Forest Park, St. Louis. 


89 





















































| 
| | 
| a 2116 —_—— — ~~. 
| i 7 oo See 624 
as Oba 
9 a No) 
| 0 a o> A 
| y <c lant + 11550. 21 LONG SPACED #- CENTERS 
ra =A SS y 
| —|% 3/250 erus — 
i se | | 
ee wet Aone | 
Zia my + Ce) le 
| | Qf. ay a 
: ss ae > 
| | a * fi 
2) 
2 : . > 
o Sf O Sea: VU 
1 ' 
eee KK 3 -0 — — 10°-0 mals = 
2 © Oo x ie) ° 
| bev w = 
2 
| 2 : w 
a r 
A 4 
| ~ eos 16 4 E 2 
: oy WG aS = Z 
3% ng io ty | 
| AN Ya Ons as LONG : 
tei N S 
| . r& SI'le’SQ -25' LONG SPACED 4 CENTERS 
| fc) 
y 
oy TS 
P SMT SQ°BW 2G 
aL Bil a. 8 wee wee we ee 


HALF SECTION HALF END ELEVATION 


Section of Flat Top Culvert, 20’ Span, Wabash R. R., near St. Louis, Mo. 
W. S. Newhall, Chf. Engr.; 
A. O. Cunningham, Bridge Engr. 


90 


BASE OF RAIL - a Ee ee 


= 24" 














Completed 2 


0’ Culvert, Wabash R. R. 
91 
















ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAI 


FIRE PROOFING 
) ia 















EXPANDED METAL} 
}) FIRE PROOFING § 
(Ee 








. 
eae ae 3 
: 
8 
t | * 
fF wo 4-184" ome at 
i ie" | ~ 2 
, eretnerinton_, | 
















































































— arom 
—-Sectione 


One Type of Solid Reinforced Concrete Bridge Floor, Wabash Railroad. 
W. S. Newhall, Chf. Engr.; 


A, O. Cunningham, Bridge Engr. 


92 

















# square corrugared bers 
spaced 3c toe 








Filled mith concrete 

















One Type of Solid Reinforced Concrete Bridge Floor on the C., B. & Q. R. R. 
W. L. Breckinridge, Chief Engineer; C. H. Cartlidge, Bridge Engineer. 


93 








ST. LOUIS “@g 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (} 
co. ) 






OS 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE 2 tellaaee 


> 


Lor 


Grotasseaeukaaeeres 


20° 
14-0" 
BATTER KTo 1 


1 
1 


ee 


Lo” 


5 


foo one wo eo on =n --- 


esas 
1 


"OM ie oy, 


VERT 


i°% wars. 3%4'crs, 






J2Ny B pars 9'c.10¢. 
|WiNG WALL salve rok 





MATERIAL: REQUIRED 


RRUGATED - STEEL+ BARS - CONCRETE -1980.5 CU YD 
oe CU.YDS. STONE 















































to" 


eal} CBO), INH 


Old Monroe to Mexico Branch 


BRIDGE N°. 77.22 


BATTER ro] 


CLEAR: BRANCH 
CONGREREY Ober DOXe CVI Eas 








SECTION: AT+ END 


See = we- == 5° 3/2- 
12-32". _ ------» 


SECTION: AT: CENTER 









EXPANDED META 
FIRE PROOFING (} 
co. y 


Clear Branch Culvert. Nearly 100 Culverts of this type built on the Burlington Road in the years 
19038 and 1904. 


95 






t EXPANDED METAL} 
}) FIRE PROOFING 




































































Plano Arch, 75’ Span; C., B. & Q. R: R. W. L. Breckinridge, Chief Engineer; 
C. H. Cartlidge, Bridge Engineer. 


96 





Completed anate Arch. 





¥ ST. LOUIS 


EXPANDED METAL ) 
A) FIRE PROOFING 


aA 





Culvert on C., M. & St. P. R. R. C. F. Loweth, Engineer Bridges and Buildings. 


98 





Culvert on C., M. & St. P. R. R. C. F. Loweth, Engineer Bridges and Buildings. 
Many Reinforced Concrete Culverts of all types have been built by this Road. 


99 











ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED META\ 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
C9. 










ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

| FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 











Culvert of 20/ Span, P. S. & N. R. R. M. F. Bonzano, Chief Engineer. 
160 













—_—"= << == 
{ST.LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 


| FIRE PROOFING 
/ Co. 
— 








Culvert of 6’ Span, P. S. & N. R. R. M. F. Bonzano, Chief Engineer. 
Many Culverts of both Arch and Box Sections built on this Road in the last two years. 


101 





6 ST. LOUIS 


1 EXPANDED METAL/} 
FIRE PROOFING? 
Y (9. \ 


—— | 

















Four-Track Reinforced Concrete Arch at Willoughby Run on lL. S. & M. S. R. R. Clear Span, 154’. 
E. A. Handy, Chf. Engr.; 
te Frank Beckwith, Engr. of Bridges. 









FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 











Willoughby Run Arch Completed. 


103 












rs ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL/) 

FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 


WSS 








Photograph of Lake Shore 30/ Arch during Construction. 
104 








Reinforced Concrete Arch, 30’ Span, L. S. & M. S. R. R. E. A. Handy, Chief Engineer; 
H. H. Ross, Assistant Engineer. 


105 








—— = — — ae 
a ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE PROOFING 
oO. 


> 





Angola Reinforced Concrete Arch, L. S. & M. S. R. R. 
hy. -A. Handy, Chi. bner., 
Frank Beckwith, Engr. of B. & S. 


106 





7ST. Louis “ag 


\EXPANDED METAL 
\| FIRE PROOFING | 
|} Co. : 





Appreach to Bridge Across Mississippi River at Thebes, Ill. Noble & Modjeski, Engineers. 
107 








Reinforced Concrete Arch, 60’ Span, on the Illinois Central Railway. H. U. Wallace, Chief Engineer; 


fan H. W. Parkhurst, Bridge Engineer. 











ST. LOUIS “ey 

{\EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
co. 





Reinforced Concrete Arch, 75’ Span, on the Illinois Central Railway. H. U. Wallace, Chief Engineer; 
ne H. W. Parkhurst, Bridge Engineer. 


ee ST. LOUIS. 


CaEXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 












REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS 


The position of the neutral axis in a reinforced beam is almost 
constantly changing. At the beginning of the loading it is at the 
center of gravity of the section transformed into its equivalent in con- 
crete by building out wings on each side opposite the plane of reinforce- 
ment, having a depth equal to the thickness of the metal and a total 
area equal to the area of metal multiplied by the ratio of the modulus 
of elasticity of the steel to the original modulus of the concrete in ten- 
sion. The neutral axis stays practically at this position until the stress 
on the extreme fibre of the concrete in tension equals its tensile strength. 
It then rises, as the loading proceeds, until the stress on the extreme 
fibre of the concrete in compression amounts to about one-half its ulti- 
mate strength, at which point the modulus of elasticity of the concrete 
in compression begins to decrease. This checks the upward movement 
of the axis, finally stopping it altogether sometime before the maximum 
load capacity of the beam is reached. It is the peripatetic movement 
of the neutral axis which makes it impossible to give, in simple 
equations, a satisfactory scientific expression for the conditions at all 
stages. Fortunately this is not necessary. We are chiefly interested in 
knowing how to design the most economical beam for a given strength. 

Most formule for the strength of reinforced concrete beams are 
based upon a rectilinear relation between stress and strain, and the safe 
values inserted therein, instead of the w/timate values. In our judgment 





110 












YY ST.LOUIS “@g 
\EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
ce. ay 


—s 














this is not wise, as it is impossible to know what factor of safety is ob- 
tained. Most of these formulz will take 16,000 pounds per square inch 
for the safe stress in the steel and say that there will be a factor of safety 
of four on the structure, because the ultimate strength of the steel is 
64,000 pounds per square inch. But when the elastic limit of the metal 
is passed its modulus drops fromt 30,000,000 to 5,000,000 andes tie 
cracks in the concrete become so very large immediately that we do 
not consider as available any strength that can be obtained beyond this 
limit; though this excess is considerable if the quantity of reinforce- 
ment used is only one-half what it should be, as is the case in the 
method above described. With only one-third the quantity of metal 
necessary to develop the required ultimate strength at the elastic limit, 
it is possible to break the metal entirely in two. For example, in a 
six-inch slab of rock-concrete having expanded metal imbedded in its 
lower portion, the expanded metal will always be broken apart, though 
this is soft box-annealed material. But the factor of safety for such 
construction should be four on the elastic limit, which would be equiva- 
lent to about six on the maximum load. When, therefore, we give the 
beam credit for no more strength than it can develop at the elastic limit 
of the steel reinforcement, it is desirable that this limit should be fairly 
high. With an elastic limit of 30,000 pounds per square inch the most 
economical quantity of metal reinforcement is 1.5 per cent of the area 
of the concrete, while with a limit of 50,000, one per cent only is 





1il 











ST. LOUIS 
CpEXPANDED METAL 
FIRE foe nes 








required, or a saving of approximately one-third in the cost of the 
metal. 

As has been stated in the introduction, page 5, there is still some 
discussion as to just when the first crack develops in reinforced con- 
crete; but as also there shown, a proper reinforcement will cause the 
beam to develop a large number of cracks very close together, in which 
case these cracks will be of no material consequence so long as the 
bars are stressed inside the elastic limit. Corrugated bars will accom- 
plish this result. The cracks will be close together, small in size, and 
will not be able to reach the bar itself. With plain bars, or bars of less 
positive form of bond, this is not true; and beams reinforced with such 
material cannot demonstrate immunity from injury so long as the stress 
in the bars is inside the elastic limit. Such beams exposed to the action 
of the atmosphere for a few months would be liable to have the re- 
inforcement much corroded in time. | 

In the following discussion it is assumed that a section plane be- 
fore bending is plane after bending up to an elastic limit in the metal 
reinforcement of 50,000 pounds per square inch, and up to the full 
compressive strength of the concrete, which condition will be practically 
true for corrugated bar reinforcement. The discussion further assumes 
that such a quantity of metal is used as will cause the elastic limit stress 
in the reinforcement and the full compressive strength of the concrete 
to be reached at the same time. 














‘ST.LOUIS 










|| EXPANDED 
FIRE PROOF 





ING i 





RECTANGULAR BEAMS 


mnf. 5 


Ene 





Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 


Fig. 1 is a cross section of a reinforced concrete beam. 
Fig. 2 represents the strain diagram at the ultimate load. 
Fig. 3 is the stress diagram corresponding to the above strain 


diagram. 
Let £,=Modulus of elasticity of steel in pounds per square inch. 





Zl of the concrete in compression in 
pounds per square inch. 
F=Elastic limit of steel in pounds per square inch. 


fe—=Compressive strength of concrete in pounds per square inch. 








113 












‘ “LOUIS: ~~ 
EXPANDED METAL | 
) FIRE cane 

















f—Tensile strength of concrete in pounds per square inch. 
6—Width of section in inches. 

a’—=Area of one bar in square inches. 

d—=Spacing of bars in inches. 


2 


a = . . . 
aime umber of square inches of metal per inch of width. 
€ 


ab 


—7o Total area of metal in width b. 


M.=Moment of ultimate resistance of cross-section in inch 


pounds. 
M=Bending moment of external forces in 1 inch pounds. 
W-=Total load on beam in pounds. 
P.=Total stress on metal in width b in pounds. 
P.=Total compressive stress on concrete in width D. 
P.=Total tensile stress in concrete in width b. 
N= Unit elongation of extreme fibre in compression. 
A,= Unit elongation of steel. 
e=Distance in inches from extreme fibre on tension side to 
middle plane of metal reinforcement. This thickness 
is not figured into the strength of the beam. 


114 












ST. 
\ EXPAN 
FIRE 














Referring to Fig. 3, we assume that the shaded area above the 
neutral axis represents the complete compressive stress diagram of the 
concrete, 0 s being the axis of proportionate elongation, and the neutral 
axis the axis of stress per square inch. From an examination of a 
great many such diagrams we have found that the resultant modulus— 
represented by the tangent of the angle  o s—is about two-thirds in 
rock concrete and one-half in cinder concrete as much as the original 
modulus—represented by the tangent of the angle m o s. Also that the 
total area for both kinds of concrete is about one-quarter larger than 
the triangular area n 0 s. ‘These assumptions seem crude at first, but 
as a matter of fact they are not more so than would be any formula 
intended to represent the compressive stress diagram for a class of 
concrete. The latter would give all points on the curve, whereas our 
method gives only the end of same; but our location of that point is 
as accurate as can be obtained by any method. 


We can then write the following equations: 


ROCK CONCRETE 


yaaa ee Rees eran eta: rt) 
oe 
a3 





115 












LOUIS 
DED METAL} 
PROOFING (| 
Co. 




















Bute ean 
Vo 
F 
And arp 
fy, 
Then a rage 
. QFE. 4; 
And Se=3E y, 7 
DV kis BB 
———— Hi et Ue aia MES PRGR eae ay sc sctler cule Matha aie) | daealva stelle Shoe Tehie By 
Or Vo RFE" (2) 
For the steel, 
Fig? 
aE Re eH eI fo ey tr NE LAOS ae OE 4 
P= (3) 
For the concrete in tension, 
8FE, f,ov 
Ze. fy Re | Po) rel eet ey (4) 
The empirical constant 38; is derived from the results of M. 
Considére. 











SY ST.LOUIS “@; 











We then have, 























WEA ak Ly 2s VN Aen oe ET Pe Pc oe (5) 
Bf.by, Fab  8FE, fiby, 

be eee Vee eC ot cae (6) 
Lt Le 
4. vb 15 f.by,—64 foy\\ FE. ) | 

From which cet (oe mh Ca) 

For the moment of resistance we have, 
__ farb 2y1\ , 8hbv2(i2 | 2 
Be 7 (y.+ z)+ iG 5+ mp |eotetts Erk eee: (8) 


The size of beam needed to develop a required moment of resist- 
ance can now be readily obtained from equations (2), (7) and (8). 
From (2) we obtain a numerical ratio between y, and y». when the 
constants depending only upon the particular materials used are known. 
Equation (7) gives the quantity of metal required in terms of 4, all 
other factors being known constants for the given materials. Then 
(8) gives the value of the ultimate moment of resistance in terms of | 
y, only. As the moment of resistance is to equal the bending moment | 
of the external proof loads, WM, in equation (8) is known which at 
once gives the value of y, from which all other values may be 
determined. 








Wa, 


ST. LOUIS. 
EXPANDED METAL 





FIRE PROOFING 
co. \ 





AVERAGE ROCK CONCRETE 
We have found the best average values for the constants for 1:3:6 
rock concrete to be the following: 4,=3,000,000, f.=2,000, and /f, 
=200. 

For the steel the value of E, varies but little for the different grades 
of rolled material, but F, or the elastic limit, varies greatly. As before 
stated in the introduction, we can not utilize any of the strength of 
the steel beyond the elastic limit, therefore it is desirable that this limit 
should be fairly high. 

Our corrugated bars have an elastic limit of between 50,000 and 
60,000 pounds per square inch. We therefore use for the constants for 
the steel, 4,—29,000,000 and “50,000. 

With these values equations (2), (7) and (8) reduce to the 
following respectively : 


¥o=1.72y, Lig=12- [pes OSL Lem tase se iene ni uiareisna gnc (9) 
ab 
————. Dby 26 

ad Denes and c= <7 =0.07TA=.64% Be ee (10) 
M,=27506y,’ 

A=y,+yo+e } we have, WT eH SC20R ao en eee tas CE) 


SPECIAL ROCK CONCRETE 


There are certain grades of rock that give a much more compres- 
sible concrete than the above and have at the same time a greater com- 


118 

















pressive strength. Trap rock falls within this category as well as 
certain kinds of western limestone using a well proportioned aggregate 
and a mix of 2:1:5. For such concrete we may assume the following 
constants : 

£ =2,400,000, f,=2,400, A200. 

Using the same values for the steel our equations of design then 
become : 


Yoe=1s 1 Dy, | Tid == 12" Bias Whe Ake, aA oe ee (12) 
ab 
———— } 2b 

amen and et —=0.1324=1.1% re: (13) 
M,=26206y2 ; 

h=y,+y.+e } we have, MV peat) ay epee? ee (14) 


CINDER CONCRETE 


For'a 1:2:5 mix of cinder concrete we have 4,—750,000, f= 
750 and f,=80. 
For this material the equations become: 


¥o=0.862y, If 6=12” eC A Oa /Dy a imsteerer vier dx tae he (15) 
ab 
oe Thy 25 
d PN and =< <-=0.018h=.4% ax a (16) 
M,=6936y,? 

h=y,+y.+e we have, IW hes RI) ae en aes Ae (17) 















ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

) FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 














TABLE FOR THE DESIGNING OF 
STEEL-CONCRETE BEAMS IN AVER- 
AGE ROCK CONCRETE 1:3°6. 


TABLE FOR THE DESIGNING OF 
STEEL-CONCRETE BEAMS IN SPE- 
CIAL ROCK CONCRETE, 1:2°5. 


























M | k 7 M | &k q M\k q 

100 5.27 | 0.408 1000 | 1668 | 1.289 100 4 27 0.562 
150 6.45 500 1500 | 20.40 | 1.580 150 5 22 .689 
200 7.45 .576 2000 | 28.50 | 1 812 200 6.02 .795 
250 8 32 644 2500 | 26.30] 2.088 250 6.74 889 
300 9.12 706 3000 | 28.80 | 2.280 300 7.38 975 
350 9 85 . 762 3500 | 31.15} 2.410 350 7:95.) 1 050 
400 10.52 816 4000 | 33.25 | 2.578 400 8 62 | 1.125 
450 if Kel 864 4500 | 35.25 | 2.780 450 9.05 1.193 » 
500 11 73 - 910 5000 | 37 20 | 2 880 500 9.53 | 1.258 
550 12.38 956 5500 | 39.10 | 3.025 550 10.00 | 1.320 
600 12 90 .998 6000 | 40.80 | 3.160 600 10.44 | 1.380 
650 13.40 | 1.040 | 6500 | 42.50 | 3.285 650 10.84 | 1 4385 
700 13.92 | 1.078 | 7000 ; 44.00 | 3.410 700 11.29 | 1.486 
750 14.40 | 1.113 7500 | 45 60 | $.530 750 11.68 | 1.540 
800 14.88 | 1.151 8000 | 4700} 3.640 800 12.02 | 1.588 
850 15.3h 1.188 | 8590 | 48.55 | 3.760 850 12 41 | 1.640 
900 15 80 | 1.222 | 9000 | 49.90 | 3 860 909 12.79 | 1 686 
950 16 25 | 1.258 || 10000 | 52.70| 4.075 950 13 11} 1.735 























M 





1000 
1500 
2000 
2500 
3000 
3500 
4000 
4500 
5000 
5500 
6000 
6500 
7000 
7500 
8000 
85)) 
9000 
10009 





h 





13.49 
16.50 
19.05 
21.30 
23.35 
25.20 
26.90 
28.59 
30.10 
31.60 
33.05 
34.39 
35.65 
36 90 
38.10 
39.30 
40 40 
42.60 











M=Ultimate bending moment of external 
forces in thousands of inch pounds. 

h=Depth of beam in inches. 

q=Number of square inches oi metal re- 
quired in beam one foot wide. 

Depth to metal taken at 0.9h. 











M=UvUltimate bending moment of external 


h=Depth of beam in inches. 
q=Number of square inches of metal re- 


quired in beam one foot wide. 


Depth to metal taken at 0.9h. 


forces in thousands of inch pounds. 









ST. LOUIS “® 

EXPANDED METAL# 

| FIRE PROOFING ( 
Ce. 





| | 
TABLE OF SPACING REQUIRED FOR DIFFERENT SIZES OF CORRUGATED BARS | 
| FOR GIVEN AREA OF METAL IN RECTANGULAR BEAMS ONE FOOT WIDE. | 
ee Ee ee ee | 

| 











| | 












































| OLD STYLE BAR | NEW STYLE BAR. 
11 
OCH Bee I) a7" WIP Ab, yw il we | age A NY ae ; | 4" | 
/ Sr ear | BAR BAR ae Bae he || Bae | Bar | BaR | Se Gaye ma ve 

2” 1.080”) 2.220”) 3.300”! 4 200”) 6.480”)| 0.860”) 1.5007] 2 340”] 3 360”! 4.6207} 6.000”! 9.3870” | 
24%" 0.860”) 1.780”) 2.650”) 3.360”) 5.140”)| 0.290”) 1.200”) 1.870”) 2.690”) 3 700”| 4.800”| 7.500” | 

3” 0.725”) 1.480”) 2 200”) 2.800’! 4.280”|| 0.240”) 1 000”! 1.5607] 2.245”) 8 C80”) 4.000”| 6.240” | 
3” 0.620”) 1 270”) 1 890”) 2 400”) 3.670”|| 0.210”) 0.860”) 1.340”) 1.920”) 2.610”| 3.480”| 5.360” 

4” 0 540”) 1 11a”) 1.655”) 2.100’! 3.210”|| 0.180”! 0.750”! 1 175”! 1.680”! 2.310”! 3.000”) 4.680” | 
4\,” 0 480”) 0.990”) 1 470”) 1 860”) 2 850” 0 16 .) 0.670”) 1.040”! 1.490”) 2.050”) 2.670”) 4.160” 

5” 0.430”) 0.890”) 1.320”) 1.680”) 2.570’) 0.140”) 0.600”) 0.940”) 1.340”) 1.850”| 2.400”) 3.750” 
5M” 0 390”) 0.810”) 1.200”) 1.520”) 2.340”) 0.180”) 0.550”) 0.850”) 1 220”) 1.680”) 2.180”) 3.410” 

6” 0.3607) 0 Tio”) 1.100”) 1.400”) 2.140”)| 0 120”) 0.500”) 0.780”) 1.110%] 1 5380”) 2 000”| 3.120” 
614” 0.385”) 0.685”) 1.020” 1.290”| 1 970”|| 0.115”| 0.460”; 0.720] 1.080” 1.420] 1.8507] 2 880” 

ie 0.310”) 0.680”) 0 940”) 1.200”) 1.830”)! 0.100”! 0.480”! 0.670”| 0.960”| 1.320” 1.7207] 2.680” 
Ty," 0.2907) 0.590”) 0 §80”) 1.125”) 1.7Lo0”|| 0.100”) 0.400”} 0.620”) 0.890’ 1.280”) 1.600”! 2.500” 

8” 0 270”) 0.550”) 0 820”) 1.050”) 1.600”)| 0.090”) 0.380”) 0.590”) 0 810”) 1.150”} 1 500”| 2 310” 
84” 0.250%) 0 520”) 0.770”) 0.995”) 1.510” 0.080” 0.350”) 0.550”) 0.790”) 1.090”) 1.420”) 2.200” 

vi 0.240”) 0.500") 0.730”) 0.980”) 1.430” | 0.080”) 0.3830”) 0.520”) 0.750’) 1.020”) 1.380”) 2.080” 
91,” 0 280”) 0.470") 0.698") 0 8850”) 1 355”|| 0 080”) 0 320”) 0,495”! 0.710”| 0.970”| 1.260”) 1.970” 
10” 0.2207] 0 440”| 0.660”| 0.8407] 1.280”|| 0.070”! 0 300”| 0 2" OLoTm OOS cee 20 ewes te STi 
ALY 0.200”) 0.400”) 0.600”) 0.760”) 1.170” 0.075” 0.270” 0 430”| 0.610” 0.8409”| 1 090”] 1.700” | 
12” 0.185”) 0.375”) 0.550”) 0.700”} 1 070”|| 0 060”) 0.255”| 0 395”| 0.560”| 0.770”| 1.000”| 1.560” | 





121 










S” ST. LOUI 

EXPANDED METAL /| 

!) FIRE PROOFING 
(9. 








TESTS OF THE UNIONSBE TW EENSCONCKETE 
ANIDSS GEE 


A recent issue of Beton and Hisen gave the results of a series of tests upon the 
holding power of different types of rods imbedded in concrete, made in the labora- 
tories of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology by Prof. C. W. Spofford. 

Portland cement concrete was used, made in the following proportions by 
weight: One part cement, three parts sand, six parts broken stone. This mixture 
was used in order that the results would correspond with tests upon beams and 
columns which were under way at the same time. The mixture, however, is very 
lean and would not again be used. The sand was clean, but rather coarse grained, 
containing approximately 47 per cent of voids. The broken stone was a mixture of 
two parts of 1” trap and one part of 4%” trap. The mixing was thoroughly done 
by hand, the concrete being wet enough when tamped into the moulds to flush 
water to the surface. The moulds were, in some cases, not as tight as they should 
have been and some water leaked cut, carrying with it some of the cement. It is 
not believed, however, that the loss thereby was sufficient to injure the results of 
the tests except possibly in a very few cases. The rods were all thoroughly cleaned 
by a sand blast, thus insuring uniformity in the surface conditions. 

A 100,000-pound Olsen vertical testing machine was used, rigged with short 
uprights, carrying the platform upen which the specimens were placed. The load 
upon the bearing end of the concrete block was distributed by the interposition of 
a sheet of 4%” felt between the concrete and an angular steel ring resting upon the 
platform of the machine. In all cases the rod projected a short distance at the 
upper end of the block (the pull being downward at the lower end) and this pro- 
jecting end was carefully watched in order to detect the first evidence of slipping. 
The rods used were round, square, flat, square but twisted through an angle of 
20 degrees (Ransome rod), Thacher and Johnson. The table has been arranged 
from the original tabie in Reton and Eisen so that bars of the same size are 
together.—Reprinted from the Railroad Gazette, for September 18, 1903. 









PROOFING 


EXPANDED M 
FIRE 














paddtrs poy 
paddtis poy 
peddrs poy 
poddts poy 
paddis poy 
qds ajyo1ou0D 
ayorq poy 
qiyds ajatouo0+) 
peddrs poy 
poddt[s poy 
peddt[s poy 
peddt[s poy 
peddt[s poy 
peddi[s poy 
peddits poy 
peddits poy 
poddris poy 
peddt[s poy 
qjds ajyatouo0y 
yitds ajatou0—D 
qipds ajar 0d ‘QOO'FL 9B paddiys poy 
yitds ajarowo—y 
qItds ajarouwod ‘gen‘'6L 38 peddi[s poy 
yds ajarowod ‘Q00'RT 98 peddtis poy 
ayorq Poy 
axOId POY 
“UT Z-1 TT ysnorqy parrnd 
‘OOF FL SSajs *xPUL Yonor4y 
por ‘ooo'er ge peddits poy 
pula WO paysndo ajatoW0,) 
yipds ajatowo:y 
qitds ajaromoo ‘pots 18 peddi[s poy 
“ut ¢ ysnosyy parpud poy = “yrds 
AIIOUOD ALI AM ‘YOO FL OF UTVTR osor 
‘0008 0} paddozp ‘Qn0'aE 4B peddtyps poy 
A[[BUIPHJIDUOT FTAs aJorOUOD 
yids ajyatomwoy 
qttds ajarouoo ‘paddits poy 
‘ul g Ysnorygy parpnd poy “yrds 
a}ILNTOD IAM “HOG‘'R OF WIRHR asor 
‘000'9 07 peddozp ‘0090's 4 peddrts poy 
A[[Rurpnysuo; yITds ajatowo0y 


(p fur waurroads) 


DOT 
pend 


| 009° 9F 

00¢°6E 
OOL'S8 
| OOL GF 
O00 BF 
-00S°06 
| OOF 6E 





| OUS*RS 
| 00%°98 
| OOF OF 
| 006°GF 
086°8 

00898 
OOS 
| 006'¢8 
OOF 
009'08 
| 006'CF 
| o00'Le 
00168 
| 000'eS 
| 008° 9F 
| 00686 
009°8¢ 


000°09 
| 00°29 
| 002'£6 
009° CF 


000'9e 
| OOF GE 
002‘28 
| 006°9% 


00z'ee 








*syIBUayy 


out arenbs 


oas Jou Jo T 
aad spunod ut pos wo ssarjg 


“UorL 











“uOL 


CFL 
FOL 


| ST 


1a 
616 
£8b 
16 


6EE 





966 
61 
ing 
1G 
19+ 
FFE 
Sa 
619 
8LF 
IeF 
$S¢ 


G13 


886 
S66 
StS 
OFS 





s Surmvayg | 


out a1enbs 
I sso} 


yoas Jou Jo Y 


spunod u 


aad 


92°0 | OOL‘9% 
92°0 | O8TAa 
92°0 | OOL TZ 
920 006°8% 
FEO 009°ST 


120 000'8¢ 


62°0 | OOL'SS 
92°0 | 009°98 
920 ODE*Es 












9¢°0 | OOLTS 
9 0080 
1 9°0 | 009° 
| FF'0 | 009'ST 
1920) 000° 


9¢°0 | 080% 
1 9¢°0 | OOF‘ZL 
}92°0 | 00L°6 











120 009" 
68°0 | OSU'S 
19e"0 | 006‘ 
40 OSL°SL 
/8L°0 | O¢¢*0OL 
| 
| 
| ¢%'0 | 000‘¢T 
130 | 008‘ 9T 
PLO OGL EL 
/8L°0. 0088 
1 ¢3'0 | 000°FI 
/86'0 | OOL'S 
$10 | 006°CL 
|SL0 | 0&8" 
| 
/£%'0 | 008'8 
£30 | OOL'SL 

| ty 
Se| 8 
6B] & 
Be! 8 
ab): 
rs Sl eS 
ae) 5 

tee 
| S| 5 
1Boel < 
Bo| 5 
"wm _ 

w n 

f ‘ 

wn 

& 

[=A 

° 

B 





pesca 
NN 


ANNs 


dur ‘ajJa19M09 


“your 
pappequirt por so qyZuaT 


ul 








| 
| 





‘YOO[q a}a10M09 Jo az 








aienbs $-¢ 
punod f-¢ 


| p-f uosuygor 
8X8 F-G  LOYORUL, 
8X8 F-g suULOsuRY 
8X8) F-T X F-1G 
8X8 | 8-§ XZ-LT 
8X8 @-L X8-LI 
8X8 | arenbs --¢ 
RXR | punod f-¢ 
Qxg| FE X F-1G 
8X8 8-@ X Z-L TL 
8X8 | 6-1 X8-LT 
gx arenbs F-¢ 
punod F-¢ 
pf uosunygor 
F-G | TOYORYT, 
F- VULOSURY 
$2 uosuyor 
QXQ F-G AAYORUT, 
RXg | F-g oULOsURYy 
9x9 |G-| wosuyor 
9X9 | S-T AOYoRyL 
RX | Z-L auLOsuRyy 
9X9 | G-[ aMoOsuRY 
9x9 Z-| uosuyor 
9X9} 6-T rOYoRyL 
Rx | Z-T auLOsuURy 
9x9 Z-[ aulosuRy 
9x9 | G-| uosuyor 


TayoRy I, 





Z-[ oulosuRy 
Z-[ ewosuRy 


| 


“yout ‘por jo addy, | 


out 


Y 











| 
| 
| 


“1aSaLS GNV 3ALSAYONOSO 
NS34SML5qa NOINN SHL NO SLSA3L 30 SLINSAY 

















123 


ST. LOUIS. 
EXPANDED METAL 
d) FIRE PROOFING ( 





PRS emee eres 
a 
L 2 = 
+ (THEORETICAL POINT FOR L 
JOHNSONS FORMULA FOR -~ 
‘ 1}2-4 IROCK| CONCRETE|- ~ 
: is 
iva 
| Z es 































































































40 P 
of Zea) 
Le me 
i) 2 
W300 
Ww 
3 BEAM TESTS 
q JOHNSON CORRUGATED BARS 
P 200 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS TESTS+ CONCRETE 1-3-6 
18 ROSE POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE = + " 13-6 
G UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA « 1-2-4 
100 4 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 3 " 1-2°4 
GMmMl& Sue RY: a " 2-4 
: 1-2-3 










BOSTON, TRA ae i 


1.0 \. 
PERCENTAGE OF REINFORCING 


124 





POO ReZAIN Hes 


The foregoing discussion applies to beams on knife edge supports. 
Rectangular beams when incorporated in floor panels will have just 
about twice the capacity given by the formula, and the following tables, 
I to VI, are made up on this basis. 

To give a scientific discussion of this is almost impossible. It is 
a matter of actual practical experience. We can, however, see that 
it is reasonable to expect about such an increase. The haunches built 
down upon the lower flange of the supporting beams give a continuous 
girder action such as reduces the external bending moment one-third. 
Also the floor in adjacent panels produces an interior arching action, 
increasing the area of this compressive stress diagram about one-third, 
the effect of the two being to double the moment of resistance. 

If the beam does not have the haunches projecting below as de- 
scribed, but is itself the full depth throughout, then we would add 
one-third only to the value of the moment of resistance. 

Beams of Tee shape are not greatly strengthened by incorporation 
in floor panels inasmuch as most of the compressive strength comes 
from the flanges, too high up to be affected by the interior arching 
action. That is to say, P.” (see page 135) would remain practically the 
same and P.’ would be increased probably 50 per cent. But the latter 
is usually so small as to make this increase of little value. 


YY ST.LOUIS 





EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (| 
co. y 





ST. Louls. 








TABLE I. 


GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR CINDER CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS WITH NO. 16GA. 
2%" MESH EXPANDED METAL IMBEDDED. 


U=Uniformly distributed load in pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 
C=Concentrated load in tons, in middle of slab 12” wide. 






















































































| SPAN IN FEET. 
Thickness | Mo ”=Floor-Slab 
of Slab | 4 | 5 6 7 | 8 | a | 10 Moment of Resistance 
in inches. | l | l | =2Mo 
ujelulel v c||u|el/u]o, ujelule 
2 6800 68 435 0.54 300 49)... Ebony facia aeraed ree Nae hee 16300 
21% ‘1060 1.06 680 0.85)| 470)0 71|| S45 10c61 lee eer eee ote re at 25460 
3 1360 1 36|| 870 1.09 605|0.91. 445/0.78|| 340)0.68]|....|.... ae | 32830 
3% “1640 1.64 1050/1.31|| 725 1.09) 535/0.94!| 410)0.82}| 3250.73 | Sdoallsocs | 39210 
4 1900 1 90, |1220/1.52)| 845 1.27] 620|1 09|) 475)0.95]) 8800.85), 305/0.76 45700 
4, ove 18}|1390 1.74) 970 1.45 710}L 24)| 545/1.09 430/0.97 | 350 0.87 52200 
5 AS 1560)1 96)| 1090 1.63, 795)\1.40}) 610/1.22 na ge | 390 oe 58750 
5% | mile 1740 ae 1210)1 at 890|1 55|| 680/1 36 540 1.21 | 440|1 09) 65300 
6 os 00) 1910 2.39) 1330 2 975|1.71)|| 750 1.49] pase ta | 480 1.20| 71900 
| u="e 3 ae l=span in feet. 





126 





TABLE I 


GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR CINDER CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS WITH No. 10GA. 
3” MESH EXPANDED METAL IMBEDDED. 


U=Uniformly distributed load in pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 
C=Concentrated load in tons, in middle of slab 12” wide. 


I. 












ST. LOUIS “®g 
EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING (| 

Co, ) 










































































| 
| SPAN IN FEET. 
| Thickness Mo”=Floor-Slab 
| of Slab Porn | eee 6 7 Sites 10 Moment of Resistance 
in inches. in l =2Mo 
| Cai CN sURi Ce OrieCe it) Way C: eUy Call Umi Can Cis 
i | | | 

2 720'0.72)| 460,0.58)) 320/0.48 17350 

24 1180|1.13)} 730.0 91}; 505)0.76)| 370/0.65)|.... 27200 

3 1620,1.62)|10351 29 720 1.08)| 525/0.92)) 405)0.81 38300 
| 3h, 2140/2. 14)/1370/1.71,) 950 1.42|| 700)1.22 | 535|1.07|| 425)0.95 51300 

4 2490/2 49)/1595/1. 99 |1110)1 66, 815}1 42 | 620/1.24]| 490/1.11}} 400) 1.00 59800 

41% 2850 2. 86 1920 2.28 1270 1.90 930)1. 62!) 710)1.42|| 565)1.26)| 455) 1.14 68300 

5 3200/3. 20/2050 2.56) | 1430/2. 13//1050/1.83)| 800/1.60}} 6830/1 42}| 510)1.28 76900 

5% 3560]3.56||2280|2.85!/ 1580/2. 37||1165/2.03)| 890)1.78|| 705!1 58)| 570}1 42 85500 

6 3950/3 95 2520 3.14 |1750)2 62||1280/2.24|| 980/1.96]| 775/1.74/| 6301.57 94200 

u="27 C nT l=span in feet. 















































EXPANDED METAL 
!) FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 








TABLE III. 
GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR CINDER CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS, USING %” SQUARE 


CORRUGATED STEEL BARS OF SUCH SPACING AS TO MAKE THE SLABS 


OF EQUAL STRENGTH IN TENSION AND COMPRESSION. 


pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 
in middle of slab 12” wide. 


=Uniformly distributed load in 
C=Concentrated load in tons, 








Thickness of 
Slab in inches. 





SPAN IN FEET. 











Floor-Slab 





Spacing of 
Bars in inches. 
[oo] 


Mo” 


Moment of 
Resistance 
=2(Mo or Mo’] 





m oo 
= 


~ 
~ 
ro 





8%|) 930/1.85 
o| 7%||1170/2.34 
7 |/1390|2.77 
6| 6 |/1770)3 54) 











51%| 2100/4 21 
6} 5 | 2500 5 00) 


























3.37) 
4 a 





385.1 06 
490 1.35 
620 1.70 
735 2.02 
935 2.57 
1110 3.06 
1320 3.64 





| 790 











| 935/2.81 
1110 3.34 









































37500 
52400 
70000 
89000 
112400 
133000 
170000 
202000 
240000 








l=span in feet. 















ST. LOUIS 
{\EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING (] 

ce. ) 












GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR ROCK CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS WITH No. 16GA. 
2%2” MESH EXPANDED METAL IMBEDDED. 


TABLE IV. 





U=Uniformly distributed load in pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 


C=Concentrated load in tons, in middle of slab 12” wide. 














Thickness 
of Slab 


in inches. 





SPAN IN FEET. 








10 








wal Cele] hee 


| C 


lu | 


Cc 


U 





930)0.93)| 595 














0.75 
0.97 
1.20 
1.43 
1.66 
1.89 
2.12 


(2.35 





) 2.57 


415 
540 
665 
790 
920 
1050 
1180 
1300 
1430 








OG 2 ererorel | etors 
400)0.69]|....].... 


0.81 
1.00 
1219 
1 38 
1.57 
1.76 
1.96 
plats 








490|0.86 
580|1.02 
675|1.18 
770\1.35 
865)1.51 
960|1.67 
1050/1.84 





i=span in feet. 


























330 
375 
425 


| 470 
|| 520 





0.83 
0.94 
1.06 
1.17 
1.29 











M o”=Floor-Slab 
Moment of Resistance 


=2Mo 


22450 
29200 
36000 
42850 
49700 
56600 
63500 
70400 
77300 











TABLE V. 


GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR ROCK CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS WITH No. 10GA. 
3” MESH EXPANDED METAL IMBEDDED. 





| U=Uniformly distributed load in pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 
| C=Concentrated load in tons, in middle of slab 12” wide. 








































































































SPAN IN FEET. 
| Thickness . M o”=Floor-Slab 
of Slab 4 5 6 as 8 | i) 10 Moment of Resistance 
| in inches. T 7 =2Mo 
| u/c] ulc|/ulcliuje}/ujciiu/cl|luj|c 
+ F 

2 1230 1.281] 785 0.98 545/0.82)| 400/0.70 Fe, el et BAe loor Bes || 29500 

2% 1600)1.60)/1020)1.28)) 7101.06|) 520/0.91/) 400/0.80/|....|....|)..../.... 38400 
| 3 ) 1970|1.97)/1260)1.58|| 875/1 32|| 645/1.13)| 495/0.99|) 3900.88||....|.... | 47400 
| 3% | 2350/2.35 |1500/1.88| 1050)1.57)| 770/1.34)) 590/1.17|| 465/1.04)) 8375/0 94 | 56450 
| 4 | 2730|2.73||1750 2 18] 1210/1 82) 990/1.56 680/1.36)| 540/1.21)) 435/1.09 | 65500 
4% | 3110/3. 11 1990 2.49, 1380/2 07|/1010)1.78|) 775/1.55 | 615/1.38)| 495)1. 24 74700 

5 | 3490/3. 49) |2230/2. 79) |1550/2.33//1140/1 99|) 875/1.74!| 6901.55 560)1.39 | 83850 

5% | 3870|3.87 2480 3.10, 1720 2.58} |1265/2.21)/ 970/1.94)| 765)1.72)| 620/1.55)| 93000 

6 | 4260 4.26, 2740 3.41 '1900 2.84) 1400 2.44)|1070)2. 14) 840 1.90 680)1.71 / 102200 
| : es — ae 2 
u=se if Gator l=span in feet. 














ST. LOUIS “@ 

EXPANDED METAL> 

FIRE PROOFING ( 
ce. 














TABLE VI. 


GIVING BREAKING LOADS FOR ROCK CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS, USING %” SQUARE | 
CORRUGATED STEEL BARS OF SUCH SPACING AS TO MAKE THE SLABS | 
OF EQUAL STRENGTH IN TENSION AND COMPRESSION. 


U=Uniformly distributed load in pounds per square foot, in addition to dead weight. 
C=Concentrated load in tons, in middle of slab 12” wide. 























Q 
6 3\.8 SPAN IN FEET. B33 
a = Heda 
0 S| ee l Oa sk 
aT lso 8 9 | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Sere 2 
Cale | | & Emo 
agin e ae | I322 
Basil u| Cc vj c||u c|juje|ule|vje|ulecle CUTE Cail a osines 
| | | | = 
3, 7 || 775(.55| 6011.38), 495/1.24|| 410/1.13/|..../.... GA | pe crete ae 74400 
4 | 6 ||1070/2.14!| 840|1.90/! 685/4.71|| 565/1.56|| 4751.43/| 405|1.92||....].. .|]..-.].--.[]----[.--{] 102700 
41%4| 5 ||1480/2.96||1165/2.63| 945|2.36| 780/2.15|) 660/1.97|| 560/1 82|| 480/1.69|| 420/1.58]|....|.... 142000 


5 AY) 1860|3.73||1470|3 31||/1190)2.98/| 985)2.71)| 830)2.48|} 705)2.29)| 610.2.13)| 530)1.99)) 465/1.86 179000 
5u4| 4 //2340 4.68 |1850/4.16|/1500/3. 75/1240 3.40||1040|3.12)| 885)2 88|| 765)2.68)| 665/2.50)| 585 225000 
6 | 3% |2950/5.90) 2330/5.25 1890)4.74) 1560 4 30 1310 3.94) 1120 3.65)| 965/3.38 | 8403.15 | 740 2.96 284000 
614| 3% |3250/6. 50 2560/5 .78) 2080 5.20) 1720 4.72) 1440 4.34) /1280 4.00|/1060/3.71)| 920/83. 46 810/3. 24) | 311000 
7 | 3 |/4100|\8.24||3250/7 30) 2630/6. 58)/2170/5. 98) 1830/5.48)|1560)5. 05)/1340)/4.70)/1170/4 39 1030 4.12) 395000 
7%| 3 ||4450/8.88//3500)7.88) 2850)7. 10) /2350/6.45) 1980/5 92) 1680)/5.46)/1450/5.08) 1260/4. 75) 1110 4.44 426000 | 


| | | | 


bo 
ow 
ou 











































































































co l=span in feet. 





ST.LOUIS. \~ 





SS 








TABLE FOR DESIGNING HIGHWAY CULVERT COVERS 





































































































Span 3’ 4’ 5! 6/ | Te 8’ 9/ 10’ il 
And D 6 | 9 
Fill T 3 , 7 Tp a2 p ey sd p a p ae , a T a 

1800 iL! 13, 20; 5.1) .27| 5.9} .34) 6.7 -40 7 4 47| 8 2 -54) 9.0) .60) 9.8] .67/ 10.6] .73 
2100 2! 4.5) .22) 5.4) .29] 6.2). .36] -7.0 -43/ 7.8) .52) 8.7) .58) 9.5} .64/ 10.4] .72/ 41.2! .79 
2400 3 4,7] 24 | 5.6} .81/ 65] .39) 7.4) .46| 8.3) .55| 9.2 »62/ 10.1) .68) 11.0) .77/ 11 8] .§3 

700 4/ 4.9) .25] 5.8] .83) 6.7] .42] 7.7] .49| 8.6] .57 9.7) .65) 10.6; .73}/ 11.5) .82/ 12.4] .89 
3000 bf 5.0] .26) 6.0] .35| 7.0] .44 8.0) .52} 9.0) .60/ 10.1) .69/ 11.1] .78] 12.0 87, 13.0) .96 
~ 3300 6’ 5.2 27] 6.2) .36) 7.3 46 8.3) 54) 9.4) -63/ 10.4) .72/) 11.5 “81 12.5 90) 13.5 1.00 
3600 Ne 5.3| .28| 6.4) .38} 7.5] ..48] 8.6! .56] 9 7| .66 10.6; .75) 11.9} .84/ 13.0) .94/ 14.1] 1.04 
3900 8’ 5.4] .29/ 65] .40| 7.7] .50] 8.9 58} 10.0} .69) 11.2] .78) 12.3 -88) 13.5 97) 14.6) 1.08 
4200 9/ 5.6] .80] 6.7] .41 19) ..b2\) 9.2 61 10.3 - 72) 11.6} .82! 12.8 91 14.0 O41) 15.1) 1.12 
4500 10’ 5.7) .32] 6 9] .42) 8.2] 53] 9.4! .63/10.6 74] 11.9] -85/ 13.2; .95] 14.4/ 1.05] 15.6] 1.15 
4800 ili ke 5.8| .33| 7.1] .44] 8.4 -54) 9.6) .65) 10.9, . 76) 12.2| 88) 13.5! .98/ 14.8] 1.08) 16.0) 1.19 
5100 12/ 5.9] 34) 7.3} .45] 8.6] .56] 9.9] .67/ 11.2! 78 12.5) .90) 13.8) 1 O01) 15.1] 1.12] 16.4] 1.24 
5400 13’ 6.0} .35] 7.4] .47] 8.8 -57 10.1 69 11.5 -80/ 12.8) .93] 14.1] 1.04] 15.5 15) 16.8] 1.28 
5700 14’ 6.1 .36] 7.5) .48] 9.0} .59/10.4 72} 11.7] -83) 13.1 -95) 14.5] 1.07/ 15.9] 1 19] 17.3) 1.32 
6000 15’ 6.3) EST iG time. ole ord) 61 10.6 4 11.9 85 13.4 .98 14.9, 1.10 16.4 -23| 17.8) 1.36 

T=Thickness concrete roof in inches. 
2? —=Area (in ”) of steel required per foot width. 








132 









ST. LOUIS “@y 

|\EXPANDED METAL 

| FIRE PROOFING (| 
Ce. 


































































































IN REINFORCED CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION WITH CORRUGATED BARS. 
Span 12/ GY 1c) L5f 16’ Lee 18’ 19° 20’ 
Ls ab | a2b | a2b | a2b | /a2b ab | a2b | ab ab 
Se licase seach lel g Wt | 4 dees dete tag ail ake t ed 

| 

1800 VY |11.4) .81/12.1) .86) 12.9) .93/18.7] .99 14.5) 1.06 15.3) 1.13) 16.0) 1.20) 16.8] 1.27/ 17 6) 1.34 | 

2100 2’ | 12.0) .86)12 8} .92' 13.7) .99] 14.5] 1.06] 15.3) 1.14 16 2) 1.21! 17.0] 1.29] 17.9] 1.36! 18 8| 1.45 

2400 3’ | 12.7) .92) 18 6| .98 14.5] 1.06] 15.3) 1.13] 16.2) 1.22 17.1] 1 29] 18 0} 1.37] 18.9] 1.45] 20.0) 1 54 

2700 4’ 13.3} .98) 14.4 nO 15.3} 1.13] 16.1] 1.21] 17 2 1.29| 18.1) 1.37) 19.0] 1.46] 20.0) 1.54) 21.1] 1.64 

3000 Las 14.0] 1.04) 15.1) 1.12 16.1) 1.20] 17.0) 1.28] 18 1 1.32) 19 1 1.46) 20.1] 1.55) 21.1] 1.64] 22 1) 1.75 

3300 6’ 14.6) 1.09] 15.7] 1.17] 16.7) 1.25] 17.7] 1.35] 18.9) 1.43] 19 9 1 52) 21.0) 1.62} 22.0] 1.71] 23 0) 1.82 

3600 fi 15.2) 1.13) 16 3) 1.21) 17.4 1.80] 18.5] 1.41] 19.6] 1.49} 20.7| 1.58] 21.8] 1.69] 22 9] 1.78] 24 0] 1.89 

3900 8’ 15.7} 1.17) 17.0] 1 27] 18.0) 1.36) 19.2] 1.47] 20.3] 1.55 21.4/ 1.64/ 22.5 1.76} 23.7) 1.85 24.8) 1 97 | 

4200 9 | 16.3) 1.22/ 17.6] 1.32 18.6) 1.41/ 19.8) 1.53) 21.0) 1 61| 22.1) 1.72) 23.3) 1.83] 24.5] 1.95] 25.7/ 2.04 | 

4500 10’ | 16.9] 1.26) 18 1| 1.36) 19.3) 1 47] 20 5) 1.58] 21.7) 1.68] 22.9] 1.78] 24.1] 1.90] 25.3] 2.01] 26.6) 2.12 

4800 | 11’ | 17.4] 1.30] 18.5] 1.41} 19.8) 1.52) 21.1) 1.63) 22.3) 1.73] 28.6) 1.84) 24.8) 1.96] 26.0] 2.07] 27.4] 2.19 

5100 12’ | 17 8| 1.34) 19.0/ 1.46) 20.3) 1.57) 21 7] 1.68) 23 0) 1.78! 24.3) 1.90) 25.5] 2.02} 26.8) 2.13] 28.1) 2.25 

5400 | 18’ | 18.2] 1.38) 19.5! 1.51! 20.9) 1 62] 22.2] 1.73 23.6) 1.84} 25.0 1.95, 26.3] 2.08} 27.6] 2.19} 28.9} 2.31 | 

5700 14’ | 18.7) 1 42) 20.1) 1 56, 21.6} 1.67] 23.0) 1.78] 24.5) 1.90] 25.9! 2 02) 27.3] 2.14] 28 7| 2 25] 29.8] 2.38 

6000 15°* | 19° 3) 2 48 20.8) 1.60} 22.3] 1.72] 28 9] 1.85 25.4 1.96) 26.9 2.07 28.4! 2.20} 29.9) 2.32) 30.4) 2.44 

W=Uniformly distributed breaking load in pounds per square foot (includes road roller, 

24 tons, on 1201’). 
Note.—Factor of safety: 4 on live load, 2 on dead load. 








183 








LOCATION OF NEUTRAL AXIS 


In beams of Tee section y, is the same as for rectangular sections 
inasmuch as the position of the neutral axis is determined by the 
relative values of maximum compressibility of the concrete and exten- 
sibility of the steel inside the elastic limit or by the ratio of A, and d,. 
This is of course only true at the maximum load. 

We then have as before, 

wy) 
ees, 4:0 16) a) sk8) es 620.6 1a 6 6 wie) “on eugi'elle a aWeNele te. aif} sel ie) (shelenel eiels (18) 
Sy pee 






YY ST.LOUIS “@g 
EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING (| 

Co. 








VALUES OF b, AND t. 





Let S,— Total shear in pounds along the two vertical planes of attach- 
ment between the wings and beam; 


‘S\\= Total shear in pounds along the horizontal plane of attach- 
ment between the rib and floor plate; 


s—= Maximum shearing strength of concrete in pounds per square 
inch: 
/ 
[gees 
a4 
¢=Length of span in feet; 


P= Total compression in pounds at maximum load between neu- 
tral axis and underside of floor plate; 


P= Total compression in pounds in flange at maximum load. 
All other functions as shown on cut, and in inches. 


There are three methods of failure above the neutral axis: 
1. By compression in the flange; 

2. By deficiency in S, owing to smallness of t; 

3. By deficiency in S, owing to smallness of D. 














ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 

(9. 











It would be desirable to have equal strength in all these directions, 
but this is not always possible owing to other considerations. Where 
it is possible we have, 


tte Oey CE NAYS Foe is Arye ete 2 Mee ee ene Er aroma AS) 
But 5,23 OS ee ee ee Seca een ee Poe eC) 
and SiS j==GLS72, tee eee eA aul ater A as oe se ene een be AOA) 


The shearing stress is a maximum at the ends and for uniformly 
loaded beam varies uniformly to zero at the center. The value S. 
may be increased about 50 per cent owing to the metal reinforcement 
in the underside of floor plate which is always present in these designs. 
If vertical shear bars were used the same increase could be made in 
‘S;, but ordinarily these would not be used so we will not separately 
discuss this condition. Equation (21) then becomes 


So == OS) ee ROP rey goer ey se amy ree BE eT (22) 
Assuming the compression stress diagram to be a parabola 
P=", (A—K%) fy by, 02 os eee eae the eye brid aca ed @ oe 


This is on the assumption that the outer ends of the wings would 
be just as heavily stressed as the portion next to the beam. This would 
not be the case, the stress varying according to the ordinates to a 
parabola from zero at the outer ends to a maximum at the beam, and 





136 














\EXPANDED METAL 
IRE Pts 


IF 





we should, therefore, multiply the above value by 24. The portion 
of this width over the beam itself would not be subject to this modi- 
fication, but there are other influences tending to offset this so that 
the above is sufficiently correct. 


et ei ae ee lee EL Dri, overt ces Siclens eee ee ea ene es « (24) 


From (20) and (22) we see that if ¢ is not less than 





failure 
=f | 

will not occur along the vertical sides of beam where wings attach. 

Now we will assume at once that ft will not be allowed to have a value 

less than this. This leaves us to consider the relation between P,.” and 

S;, only. We then have from (20) and (24) 


3bs1=—— (1K) fy 9, from which 
27bst 








o— RO eee ES RE OTE 25 
GES ay, aes 
The theoretical relation between s and f, is 
Se 9 
29 6 
Cena (see Johnson’s Materials of Construction, p. 29). . (26) 


where @ is the angle made by the plane of rupture on a compression 
specimen of moderate length with a plane at right angles to the 
direction of stress. 





137 

















But this value is high in view of the liability of concrete to crack 
and we recommend that twice the strength be provided in the shearing 
values on this basis that is used in compression. 


We would then have S,—2P,” or 
8 : 
arg Oe iS.) F.4,y; from which 


re 27bsl 
80h) fay 
we have with sufficient accuracy, 
we bl 
Rey 
We will now insert this value in (24) and proceed to obtain the 
moment of resistance. At times the above value of b1 would be greater 
than the spacing of the beams, in which case the latter distance would 


be used for the value of b, in (24) and the other values worked over 
on this basis. 





and substituting the value of s 























Pra fal ee ti eo es aoe ae Sa, a 
ANSO MME MC t sf DY ei aa es. 55 «501 aes ae Meee mee tr 
Then Pra Pr+ Pr 52 / . + K%y, 
I 6 Toe PED E Fh ERS eee OE Ee eee COE (32) 
Fab 
ee ee ees ee enn ee a te (33) 
EO eam coed ical Lake et Ne oc ease ey “ho, wal ROR corals male (34) 
From which 
Zi we f.0 7 22 ear) | 
I= F (+ K sy) —8 fis | Sa eet ae oe (35) 
and M.=BP, Ae pres Hse Heyy el ase ees (36) 


Problem: Required the size of Tee-shaped beam necessary to carry 
a total ultimate load of 600 pounds per square foot on a span of 32 
feet, ribs to be 9 feet apart. 





139 









¥ ST. LOUIS. 


EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE epee 








12x9x600x1024 : 
Then IY aed KS “3 = -==8,300,000 inch pounds. 





Let us assume a depth of beam h equal to 22”. Then y,+y,=20”. 
For this spacing of beams the thickness of floor plate should be 4”. 


Using special rock concrete we have from (12) 














20 ur —— Pre 
MP aise fog and 3 ra KO ‘ 
Fi Se enna 
bai 9.3 
Then 
Pi=/,K ef by;= /3 X.43X24009.36= 64006 
Py =< fl =< 2400326  =341006 
and Vee =405006 
P= 87 O¥.=.8 200% 10,76 == 41/160 
cheng se =387856 
and 
a’b_ 887856. 
7 — 50000. 766 





140 














TSE ee aan SLA Ap 





2 

—64004 x 2.65-+341008 x 7.38+17155%5.35+387855 x 10.7 

= 6901306 
8,300,000 _ 7 
or, =—690130 7 12:98 

Substituting in (28) we have 
125632 
ee ee OO’ a i 
ce wee 


As this value of b,, which we have used in determining the value 
of P."" above, is less than the spacing of the beams it is the proper one 
to have used. It will be noted that ¢ is just one-third of b. 

From the foregoing we derive the following relations for good 
grade of 1:2:5 Portland cement rock, concrete, where f,=2400; A= 
200; 4 ,=2,400,000; 4,=29,000,000; “—50,000. 


P/=1600K %4y,; P=160dy,; P."=106687. 


ab_Pl-PAP." 


ee 50,000 


number of square inches of metal required 





in rib. 











141 






ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 












P22 =ultimate mo- 


M.= t 9 








: t Lad t 
ae C3 tig ) +P, (yeh ¥ 2 ) 
ment of resistance in inch pounds. 


All measures of length in inches except /, the length of span, which 
isupateet: 

The value of t must not be less than one-third D. 

The value of b, represents the maximum width of flange that can 
be utilized in figuring the strength of the Tee, and its value is: 


anes: 
~ Ay 


distance between the ribs, the above formule and the following table 
could not be used, and the value of P.’’ would have to be obtained from 
the general equation (24). 

The values in the following table are based upon the foregoing 
values for good rock concrete: 


b, Where this value of b, exceeds materially the 








142 


“ST.LOUIS 






















































































TABLE FOR THE DESIGN OF TEE BEAMS. 
34 Ultimate Panel 
e V1 Yo Kk K*‘/2 Area of Steel moment width by | 
2.0 3.26 3.74 . 080 023 b(—.0096+4- 0213 1) b(— 654+ 5866 1) .314 bl. 
2.0 3.72 4 28 .193 - 085 b(—.0036-+-.0213 1) b(+ 882+ 6982 1) .294 bl. 
2.0 4.2 4.8 . 286 153 b(+.0052+-.0213 1) b( 3708+ 8000 1) .281 bl. 
2.0 4.65 5.35 3855 212 b(+.0144+ .0213 1) b( 7448+ 9067 1) .272 dl. 
2.2 5.0 5.8 400 . 253 b(+.0219-+-.0213 1) b( 11072+ 9920 1) .268 bl. 
2.4 5.4 6.2 445 297 b(+-.0315+-.0213 1) b( 35917+-10773 1) .263 bl. | 
2.5 5.8 6.7 .483 .336 b(+. 0409+.0213 1) b( 21667+-11734 1) .260 bl. | 
2.7 6.2 iow! .516 Baye b(+-.0509+-.0213 1} b( 27983+-12587 1) .256 bl. 
2.8 6.6 7.6 545 -400 b(+.0602+ .0213 1) b( 35085+-13547 1) .253 bl. 
3.0 7.0 8.0 570 -430 b(+.0707+-.0213 1) b( 48040-+14400 1) .250 bl. 
3.0 7.4 8.6 596 .460 b(+.0814+-.0213 1) b( 583822+-15474 1) .250 bl. 
3.0 7.9 9.1 .620 .488 b(+. 0942+ .0213 1) b( 64609+-16533 1) .247 bl. 
3.0 8.4 9.6 612 515 b(+ 1077-+-.0213 1) b( 77768+17596 1) .245 bl. | 
3.0 8.8 10.2 660 -536 b(+.11838+.0213 1) | b( 90572418667 1) ~245 DLS | 
2.0 4.2 4.8 047 -O10 b(—.0140-+-.0213 1) b(—1514+ 7467 1) .240 bl. 
2.0 4.65 5.35 .140 052 b(—.0094+-.0213 1) b(— 938+ 85383 1) | .227 bl. 
2.2 5.12 5.88 .218 102 b(—.0021-++.0213 1) b(+ 2616+ 9600 1) -217 bi: 
2.4 5.6 6.4 . 286 . 153 b(+.0069-+-.0213 1) b( 6595-+-10667 1) spahigoylg | 
2.5 6.05 6.95 339 .197 b(+.0158-+-.0213 1) b( 11320+-11733 1) .206 bl. | 
2.6 6.5 iD 885 239 b(+.0257+-.0213 1) b( 17252+12800 1) -202 bl. | 
2.8 7.0 8.0 429 281 b(+..0373+-.0213 1) Py 24777+-13867 1) | .199 bl. 
3.2 7.4 8.6 .459 311 b(+.0461+-.0213 1) b( 32008+14933 1) .196 bl. 
3.4 1.9 9.1 -493 346 b(+.0583--.0218 1) b( 416974-16000 1) | .194 bl. 
3.5 84 9.6 524 379 b(+-.0712+.0218 1) b( 527386+-17067 1) .192 bl. 
3.6 8.8 10.2 . 546 - 403 b(+.0808-++-.0213 1) b( 68169-+-181383 1) -190 bla) 
: 2.3 Dao 6.4 107 0385 b(—.0142+4- 0213 1) b(—1176+-101383 1) 185 bl. | 
; 2.6 6.05 6.95 .174 .073 b(—.0081+-.0213 1) b(-+1421+-11200 1) .178 bl. 
: 30 6.5 1.5 243 120 b(+.0010+-.0213 1) b( 57964-12267 1) vii Jail. 
; 3.0 UY 8.0 286 153 b(+.0087-+-.0213 1) b( 103806+-13333 1) .169 bl. | 
; 32 7.4 8.6 .329 -185 b(+..0163-+-.0213 1) b( 15545414400 1) .166 bl. 
20. 3.4 7.9 Gea 367 222 b(+.0270+-.0213 1) b( 22978415467 1) .163 bl. 
21. 3.5 8.4 9.6 404 ara b(+.0884+-.0213 1) b( 31657+16533 1) .160 bl. 
22. 3.7 88 10.2 432 . 284 b(+.0473-+-.0213 1) b( 40064+4-17600 1) .159 bl. 
24. 4.0 9.3 10.7 . 463 315 b(+.0595-+-.0213 1) b( 51069+-18667 1) Sy Mok 
74% 4.0 9.77 | 11.23 .489 342 b(+-.0710+.0213 1) b( 62696+-19733 1) .155 bl. 













ST. LOUIS: 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 





SHEAR IN REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS 


Let J/,=moment of resistance in inch pounds at 12’’ from end of beam carry- 
ing its ultimate load. 
M,=ultimate moment of resistance in inch pounds at center. 
7=span of beam in feet. 
A,=elongation per inch at the plane of the metal, at section 12”’ from end. 
5=width of beam in inches. 
s=ultimate shearing strength of the concrete, about one-fourth the ulti- 
mate compressive strength. 
Other functions as shown on pages 113 and 114. 











4/—4 

Then 174 — pp Mo for uniformly loaded beam ................--. ee ee ee ees (1) 

M, 
A= Fr By? Bho By? Fog G2O Yq ceaceesecnecereneccennsceencesensterctenesnnannnncanatrnecerentren (25 

By, el as ee 

(AV I, 
by, 7=byy*+ I I er ree) 
Sf eesene A iesa Ae TERE Pama i erate oe Tee eRe ens. eS MG 
Pg: sae a ote es cen econ ae en) 


a*b 
After designing the beam by the beam formule, pages (118) and (119) = 


y,+y72) Ec, Es, and 6 are known. From (1) we obtain 44, and from (3) and (4) 
| y, and yj. From (2) will be obtained A,, which inserted in (5) will give the pull 











\Y ST. LOUIS 






EXPANDED METAL} 
| FIRE oy 











in the bars which has to be absorbed by shearing stress in the concrete over an 
area—124. As it is desirable to take twice the factor of safety in shear that is 
taken in bending, P. ; should not exceed 6bs, where s is taken at one-fourth the 
compressive strength of the concrete. 

If beams are loaded at two points some distance apart the maximum shearing 
stress is likely to be of a very different character. The bending moment being 
uniform between the loading points, the first cracks on the tension flange are as apt 
to occur under one of the loads as in the middle and this will greatly reduce the 
strength of the anchorage of the ends of the bars represented by the shearing 
resistance of the concrete along the plane just above the metal between the crack 
and the end of the beam. This is especially true as the maximum shearing stress 
along this plane is likely to be double the average stress. In such cases, as also 
in cases of uniform load where the shear exceeds the limits above given, ’the bars 
should be bent up at the ends as shown in Figs. (1) and (2). 














145 






ST. LOUIS. 

EXPANDED METAL 

\ FIRE PROOFING 
C9. 


Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 74 days. Depth, 5”; Width, 12”; Span, 10’; Two 1%” corrugated bars=.340”. 
Theoretical, Mo=80,600” pounds; Actual, M=94,200” pounds. No shear bars used. 


146 


SY st.Louis “ey 
(\EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING| 

| Co, 


——— =< 


h) 











Rock Concrete. 1:2:5; Age 72 days. Depth, 7”; Width, 12”; Span, 12’; Three 1%” corrugated bars=.510”. 
Theoretical, Mo=174,200” pounds; Actual, M—=212,160” pounds. No shear bars used. 


147 





ST. LOUIS. 


Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 76 days. 


Theoretical, Mo 
each end. 





—999 9 


——J 44,4 


00” pounds; Actual, M=—402,700” 
148 


pounds. 


Four 


vertical rods 





Depth, 914”; Width, 12”; Span, 15’; Four %” corrugated bars=.680”. 


inserted near 





Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 73 days. 








ee Soe 


} 





Came & 





Depth, 14”; Width, 12”; Span, 15’; 
Theoretical, Mo=725,000” pounds; Actual, M=929,700” pounds. 


zontal rods bent up vertically at different subdivisions of span. 


149 


w" 


Six 1%4” corrugated bars=1.02 


Each of the three pairs of hori- 


ST. Louis “ 

EXPANDED METAL 

| FIRE PROOFING 
o 


2 ———— ee 
YS ST. Louis. 
EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE PROOFING 
\ C9. \ 


Rock Concrete, Age 71 days. Depth, 10”; Width, 12”; Span, 12’; Two %” corrugated bars=.620 
Theoretical, M0283 000” pounds; Actual, M=314, 200” pounds. No shear bars used. 


150 





| 
) FIRE PRO 
Oo, 


Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 69 days. Depth, 1444”; Width, 12”; Span, 15’; Three %” corrugated bars=.930” . 
Theoretical, Mo—625,000” pounds; Actual, M=637,600” pounds. Two bars bent up at quarter point 
which was too close to center for method of testing. 


151 








ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

FIRE PROOFING 
Co. 


Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 115 days. Depth, 1444”; Width, 12”; Span, 15’; Three %” corrugated bars=.930”. 
Theoretical, Mo=—625,000” pounds; Actual, M=655,000” pounds. Four vertical bars at each end. 


152 





Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 78 days. Depth, 19”; Width, 12”; Span, 18’; Four 
Theoretical, Mo=1,121,000” pounds; Actual, M=1,190,900” pounds. 


ay 
TA. 
No shearing provision whatever. 








” corrugated bars=1.24 


\ EXPANDED METAL 
\| FIRE PROOFING | 
} co 

eee 


Pas ee ST ace 


uw” 


Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 78 days. Depth, 19”; idth 12”; Span 18’; Four 34” corrugated bars=1.240”. 
Theoretical, Mo=1,121,000” pounds; Actual, M=1,151,800” pounds. Four vertical bars at each end. 


154 





= ST. LOUIS “ea 
EXPANDED METAL 
¥ FIRE PROOFING( 


Co. 





























Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 70 days. Depth, 19”; Width, 12”; Span, 17’ 8”; Four %” corrugated bars=1.240”. 
Theoretical, Mo=1,121,000” pounds; Actual, M=1,142,500” pounds. Four vertical bars at each end. 


155 


| 







ST. LOUIS 

EXPANDED METAL 

) FIRE PROOFING } 
°. \ 





Rock Concrete, 1:2:5; Age 77 days. 


Theoretical, 


Mo=725,000/” 


pounds; 








Depth, 14”; Width, 12”; Span, 15’; Two %” corrugated bars=1.10”.. 


Actual, 


M=755,500” 


pounds. 


Four vertical bars at each end. 


Rock Concrete. 1:2:5; Age 75 days. Depth, 18”; Width, 12”; Span, 18’; Two 1” corrugated bars=1.40”. 
Theoretical, Mo=1,177,800” pounds; Actual, M=1,149,300” pounds, Four vertical bars at each end. 


157 





FROOFING 


FIRE 


EXPANDED METAL 
C9. 


‘doy, uo Surysnig Aq pole 


‘paex AACN UATYOOIgG 9} 78 Ope 3SAL 





158 

















BRIDGES, ABUTMENTS, CULVERTS. 


CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY RAILROAD. 

WABASH RAILROAD. 

SOUTHERN RAILWAY. 

CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUI RAILWAY. 

ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD. 

HANNIBAL & ST. JOSEPH RAILROAD. 

CHICAGO & EASTERN ILLINOIS RAILROAD. 

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD. 

LAKE SHORE & MICHIGAN SOUTHERN RAILWAY. 

CHICAGO & WESTERN INDIANA RAILROAD. 

ILLINOIS TERMINAL RAILROAD. 

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD SYSTEM, 

TERMINAL RAILROAD ASSOCIATION OF ST. LOUIS. 

NEW YORK RAPID TRANSIT COMMISSION, NEW YORK CITY. 
CHICAGO & MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC RAILWAY. 

PITTSBURG, SHAWMUT & NORTHERN RAILROAD. 
SOUTHERN PACIFIC LINES. 

KANSAS CITY, MEXICO & ORIENT RAILWAY, KANSAS CITY, MO. 
DANSVILLE & MOUNT MORRIS RAILROAD. 

CLEVELAND, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY. 
GASCONADE RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION CO. 

KANSAS CITY OUTER BELT & ELECTRIC RAILWAY. 
BOSTON SUBWAY TUNNEL. 

INDIANAPOLIS NORTHERN TRACTION RAILWAY. 


MUSKOGEE UNION RAILWAY, MUSKOGEEH, IND. TER. 
INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT CO., OLEAN, N. Y. 
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BRIDGE, THEBES, ILL. 
AMERICAN BRIDGE CO., NEW YORK. 
BLOCK BRIDGE & CULVERT CO., INDIANAPOLIS. 


OWEGO BRIDGE CO.. . ROME, N. Y. 
D. CUOZZO & BRO. (STREET BRIDGE), BROOKLYN. 





159 


EXPANDED META 
FIRE PROOFING (5 
ce. y 














JNO. W. TOWLE, 

JOHN JACOB ASTOR, 

LOUISIANA PURCHASE EXPOSITION, 
CONCRETE ARCH (STANTON & SON, Engrs.), 
VANDALIA LINE, 

MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY, 

ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY, 
INDIANA BRIDGE CO., 

BOX CULVERTS, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

THEBES RAILROAD BRIDGE, 


ATLANTA, KNOXVILLE & NORTHERN RAILWAY, 


DENVER & RIO GRANDE RAILROAD, 
BURLINGTON & MISSOURI RIVER RAILWAY CO., 
WHEELING & LAKE ERIE RAILWAY, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND & PACIFIC RAILWAY, 
ARCH BRIDGE, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

NINE ARCH BRIDGES, 

FLAT TOP CULVERT, 400’, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

ARCH BRIDGE, 

NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY, 


KNOXVILLE, LA FOLLETTE & JELLICO RAILWAY. 
Cor 


CHICAGO & GREAT LAKES D. & D. : 
MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC RAILWAY & LIGHT CO.; 
CHICAGO & MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC RAILWAY, 
R. Z. SNELL. 

WISCONSIN BRIDGE CO., 

LOGAN STREET BRIDGE, 

GOOSE CREEK BRIDGE, 


OMAHA, NEB. 
RHINECLIFF, N. Y. 
ST. LOUIS. 
VICKSBURG, MISS. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 
KANSAS CITY, MO. 
ST. LOUIS. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 
JACKSON, TENN. 
MANSFIELD, ILL. 
THEBES, ILL. 
ATLANTA, GA. 
SALT LAKE CITY. 
LINCOLN, NEB. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
TRAVERSE, MICH. 


CHICAGO. 


MOORESVILLE, IND. 
HADLEY, IND. 
MORGANTOWN, IND. 
PLAINFIELD, ILL. 
IOWA CITY. IA. 
BROWNBERG, IND. 


AMO, IND 


ROANOKE, VA. 


CHICAGO, 
MILWAUKEE, WIS. 
CHICAGO. 

SOUTH BEND, IND. 
MILWAUKEE, WIS. 
LANSING, MICH. 


MARION CO., IND 


= 








160 








NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY, 

GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY, 

CENTRAL OF GEORGIA, 

ILLINOIS TERMINAL RAILRCAD, 

FONDA, JOHNSTOWN & GLOVERSVILLE RAILROAD, 
JOHN C. RODGERS, 

CONCRETE ARCHES, 

VOEPP & FRITZ, 

MALLOY, REXFORD & CO., 
GORDON PARK BRIDGE, 
ROCKEFELLER BRIDGE, 
EUCLID CREEK BRIDGE, 
HAYDEN AVENUE BRIDGE, 
HIGHLAND ROAD BRIDGE, 
BALKE & KRAUSS CO., 
NORTHERN OHIO PAVING CO., 
HANLON CONSTRUCTION CO., 


FLOORS, FOOTINGS, RETAINING WALLS. 


STAR BUILDING, 

CARLETON BUILDING, 
NORVELL-SHAPLEIGH BUILDING, 
WOMAN’S MAGAZINE BUILDING, 
MAPLE AVENUE M. E. CHURCH, 
BASEBALL PARK, 

ST. LOUIS TRANSFER CoO., 

J. L. WEES, 

ST. LOUIS PORTLAND CEMENT CO., 
LINCOLN CENTER BUILDING, 
FEDERAL LEAD COoO., 

V. JOBST & SONS, 







ST, PAUL, MINN. 
ST. PAUL, MINN. | 
ATLANTA, GA. | 
ALTON, ILL. | 
GLOVERSVILLH, N. Y. 
NEW YORK. 
MONASSEN, PA. 

MARION CoO., IND. 


CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 
CLEVELAND, OHIO. 


WILLIAMS BRIDGE, N. Y. | 
| 
| 


ST. LOUIS. 


“ec 


“e 


PY; | 


oe 


CHICAGO. 
FEDERAL, ILL. 
PEORIA, ILL. 











161 


aaa | 
ST. LOUIS 
EXPANDED METAL} 
FIRE PROOFING (] 
ce. 














AMERICAN CONCRETE STEEL CoO., NEWARK, N. J. 


YAMPA SMELTING CO., SALT LAKE CITY. 
ROCHEFORD & GOULD, ‘ OMAHA, NEB. 
GEHO. A. FULLER CoO., NEW YORK. 
HARVEY LAND & IMPROVEMENT CcO., HARVEY, LA. 
SCHLITZ BREWING CoO., MILWAUKEE. 
GREELY SUGAR CO., GREELY, COLO. 
COLORADO COLLEGE, COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. 
WILSON OFFICE BUILDING, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
BUFFALO EXPANDED METAL CO., BUFFALO, N. Y. 
GALVESTON SEA WALL, GALVESTON, TEXAS. 
DWIGHT BUILDING, KANSAS CITY. 
METROPOLITAN STREET RAILWAY POWER HOUSE, KANSAS CITY. 
BUCKINGHAM HOTEL, ST. LOUIS. 
UNION MANUFACTURING & POWER CO., SANTUC, S.C. 
WESTERN EXP. METAL & F. P. CO., SAN FRANCISCO. 
OLIVER CHILLED PLOW WORKS, SOUTH BEND, IND. 
BARTLETT STEEL CoO., JOPLIN, MO. 
POE MUU, NEW ORLEANS. 
VAL. BLATZ BREWING CO., MILWAUKEE, WIS. 
Bi iS WAR De COr SlLOUX CIRY SLA. 
KANSAS CITY WATER DEPARTMENT, KANSAS CITY, MO. 
CONSOLIDATED GAS CO., BALTIMORE, MD. 
C. A. SICARD, NEW ORLEANS. 
HOEFFER & CO., CHICAGO. 
PENNSYLVANIA RAILWAY SHOPS, ALTOONA, PA. 
PUMPING STATION, CHICAGO. 
PENNSYLVANIA CEMENT CoO., BATH, PA. 
RUBEL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, CHICAGO. 
RETAINING WALL, MARION CoO., IND. 
THOMPSON & NORRIS FACTORY, BROOKLYN. 
ECKENBURG MILK PRODUCT CO., CORTUAN DT Na Yi. 


AMERICAN BEET SUGAR CO., ROCKY FORD, COLO. 


























RETAINING WALL, 

RIALTO BUILDING, 

SECURITY SAVINGS BANK BUILDING, 
J. A. FOLGER COMPANY’S WAREHOUSE, 
FAIRMONT HOTEL, 

FREE PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, 
REDWOOD CITY COURT HOUSE, 


CALIFORNIA HALL, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, 


JOHN HOPKINS’ ESTATE, 
A. L. WILLEY 

J. C. WHITE & CO., 

ROACH & KIENZLE SASH AND DOOR CO., 
AMERICAN COLD STORAGE BUILDING, 
ILLINOIS STEEL CO., 

MASONIC TEMPLE, 
BERWIND-WHITE COAL MINING 
INSANE ASYLUM, 

SEWAGE PUMPING STATION, 
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION, 


CO., 


MEMPHIS, TENN. 
SAN FRANCISCO. 
SAN FRANCISCO. 


SAN FRANCISCO 


SAN FRANCISCO. 
SAN JOSE, CAL. 
CAL. 
BERKELEY, CAL. 
BALTIMORE, MD. 
BINGHAMTON, N. Y. 
MANILA, P. I. 
KANSAS CITY, MO. 
CHICAGO. 

IND. 
TEXAS. 
PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
NEW ORLEANS. 
ALGIERS, LA. 


REDWOOD CITY, 


BUFFINGTON, 
WACO, 


RESERVOIRS, TANKS, ETC. 


ACKER PROCESS CoO., 

A. ©. SHORTHILE & CO., 

PURIFICATION TANKS (Wyncoop Kiersted, Engr.), 
WATER RESERVOIR, 

MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY (GRAIN TANKS), 
WATER RESERVOIRS, 

WATER RESERVOIRS, 

WATER RESERVOIRS, 

RESERVOIR BASIN, 

OIL TANKS, 


NIAGARA FALLS. 
MARSHALLTOWN, IA. 
RICHMOND, MO. 
PADUCAH, KY. 

KANSAS CITY, MO. 

EAST ORANGE, N. J. 
YAZOO, MISS. 

AMES, IOWA. 

EAST NORWOOD. OHIO. 
CONSTABLE HOOK, N. J. 






ST. LOUIS “@; 
{EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING) 











163 


t EXPANDED METAL 
) FIRE EROUHNG 











FOLSOM & McDARGH, DAYTON, OHIO. 
WATER RESERVOIR, EDDYVILLE, KY. 
WATER RESERVOIR, ELGIN, ILL. 
WATER TANKS, LOUISVILLE, KY. 
THE TERRE HAUTE WATER WORKS CO TERRE HAUTE, IND. 
YAZOO CITY LIGHT, WATER AND SEWERAGE PLANT, YAZOO, MISS. 
LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD CoO., SOUTH LOUISVILLE. 
HOEFER & CO., LAKE GENEVA, ILL. 


TUNNELS, SUBWAYS, SEWERS. 


NEW YORK RAPID TRANSIT COMMISSION, NEW YORK. 
BOSTON RAPID TRANSIT COMMISSION, BOSTON. 
NEW ORLEANS DRAINAGE CANALS, NEW ORLEANS. 
BOROUGH CONSTRUCTION CO., ‘ BROOKLYN. 
J. B. McDONALD (N. Y. SUBWAY), NEW YORK. 
CITY OF MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. 
MOBILE SEWERS, MOBILE, ALA. 
ABBOT GAMBLE CONSTRUCTION CoO., ; poh hy MESO OA ISG 
G. BEDELL MOORE, SAN ANTONIO, TEX. 
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CO., R. R. TUNNEL, KANSAS CITY. 
HENRY HESTERBERG, = TR BROOKLYN. 
JOHN McNAMEEH, BROOKLYN. 
BACTERIAL SEWAGE PURIFYING CoO., NEW YORK. 
Mi nA DY ECO: BROOKLYN. 
LARGE SEWERS, ALTOONA, PA. 
LARGE SEWERS, GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. 


DRAINAGE CULVERT FOR ST. FRANCIS LEVEE DISTRICT, 


NEAR BREWER’S LAKE, MO. 
ING oY) gGc Li lake, vn @ Ox, NEW YORK. 
ELECTRICAL COMMISSION, BALTIMORE, MD. 





164 









\ 






EXPANDED META 


FIRE PROOFING (je 
1 co. = 


a 





NEW ORLEANS TERMINAL CoO., NEW ORLEANS. 
BOROUGH OF BROOKLYN, BROOKE YN, wNiwes 
SAGINAW SEWERS, SAGINAW, MICH. 
ROBERT HIGGINS, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 


GOVERNMENT WORK. 


MAJ. GEO. W. GOETHALS, U. S. A., NEWPORT, R. I. 
CAPA Cork G Leno Briel Bre Un Sie Ac. NEWPORT, R. I. 
CART OG. ba LlLOW iia) Un on cA. CHARLESTON, S. C. 
AUGUSTUS SMITH, NAVY YARD, CHARLESTOWN, MASS. 
MAJ. W. L. MARSHALL, U. S. A., FORT HANCOCK, N. J. 
CHAS. LE VASSEUR, U. S. ASST. ENG., ' MEMPHIS, TENN. 
AUGUSTUS SMITH, COB DOCK, BROOKLYN NAVY YARD. 
U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, VA. 
CHARLESTOWN, MASS., NAVY YARD, — BOSTON, MASS. 
COMMANDING OFFICER, PORT ROYALE SAG. 
U. S. NAVY YARD, NEW ORLEANS. 
MAJ. J. H. WILLARD, NEWPORT, R.: I. 
LIGHTHOUSES, MANILA, P. I. 
MAJ. W. L. SIBERT, PITESBURGS PAG 
U.S: Nass ALGIERS, LA. 
MISCELLANEOUS. 
SOUTHERN STATES PORTLAND CEMENT CoO., ATLANTA, GA. 
CONSOLIDATED GAS CoO., BALTIMORE. 
GEO. B. LOW, HALIFAX, N. S. 
TIDE WATER OIL CoO., CONSTABLE HOOK, N. J. 
STATE OF NEW YORK, ROCHESTER, N. Y. 
UNION UTILITY CO., MORGANTOWN. W. VA. 


PADUCAH WATER CO., PADUCAH, KY. 





165 











ST. LOUIS. Y 
EXPANDED METAL 
FIRE PROOFING 











INTERNATIONAL STEAM PUMP CO., 
MUIR & STROMBERG, 

ELECTRICAL COMMISSION, 

CITY RESERVOIR, WEIRS, 

CRAMP & CO., 

HOUSTON & BLAND, 

BACTERIAL SEWAGH PURIFYING CO., 
W. J. OLIVER (RAILROAD WORK), 
BATES & ROGERS CONSTRUCTION CO., 
N. O. NELSON & CO., SEPTIC TANKS, 
J. K. CAMPON, 

L. W. ANDERSON, CITY ENGINEER, 
LOUIS LE SASSIER, 


PARKER-RUSSELL MANUFACTURING CO., 


ELLICOTT MACHINE CoO., 

WM. F. KOSS, 

BEN. G. VEITH, 

TUCKER & VINTON, 

Es .@. sRONDYS 

J. J. CREEM, 

P. N. ASHLEY, 

J. W. WILLIAMS 
STUBBS-FLICK-JOHNSON CO., 

WwW. W. LAW, 

UNION DEV. & CONSTR. CO., 

PEDEN IRON & STEEL CO., 
WESTINGHOUSE, CHURCH, KERR & CO., 
PAXON & VIERLING IRON WORKS, 
HANSEL-ELCOCK CoO., 
COMMONWEALTH ROOFING CO., 
MADISON COUNTY GOOD ROADS COM 
J. .G. WHITH & CO: (MANILA, P.. 1); 
G. A. JOHNSON & SONS, 


IMISSION, 


HARRISON, N. J. 
NEW ORLEANS, LA. 
BALTIMORE, MD. 
Sr LOULS: 
PHILADELPHIA. 
HANNIBAL, MO. 
NEW YORK CITY. 
KNOXVILLE, TENN. 
CHICAGO. 
SOULS: 

OLEAN, N. Y. 
GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. 
NEW ORLEANS, LA. 
ST. LOUIS. 
BALTIMORE. 
INDIANAPOLIS. 
JEEFERSON CITY, MO. 
ITHACA, N. Y¥. 
INDIANAPOLIS. 
BROOKLYN. Nae 
WOODLAND, CAL. 
CLEVELAND, O. 
KANSAS CITY, MO. 
OSSINING, N. Y. 
NEW ORLEANS. 
HOUSTON, TEX. 
NEW YORK. 
OMAHA, NEB. 
MILWAUKEE, WIS. 
NEW YORK. 
JACKSON, MISS. 
NEW YORK. 
CHICAGO. 
















ST. LOUIS “® 

EXPANDED META 

FIRE PROOFING (| 
Ce. 








J. H. BURNHAM, 


NORTHERN OHIO PAVING & CONSTRUCTION CO. 


O. P. HERRICK, 

CINCINNATI GRANITOID CoO., 

JNO. McMENAMY, 

SOUTHERN ILLINOIS & MISSOURI BRIDGE CoO., 
GROCH COAL CoO., 

AMERICAN FALLS CANAL & POWER CO., 
DOWDLE & WINDETT, 

COOK & LAURIE, 

HEDGES-GOSNEY CONSTRUCTION CO., 
JACKSON & CORBETT, 

CROUSE CONSTRUCTION CoO., 
SIMONS-MAYRANT CO., 

COLLIER BRIDGE, 

CONVERSE BRIDGE CoO., 

AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION CO., 
LEVERSEDGE BRIDGE CoO., 

BARWICK CONSTRUCTION CoO., 
MOORE-MANSFIELD CONSTRUCTION CO., 
NEWCASTLE BRIDGE CoO., 

i ea teh ORBIT MAL Tele), 

W. H. HERR, 

FALLS CITY ARTIFICIAL STONE CoO., 
ELECTRIC COMMISSION, 

EJ. TOBIN & CO., 

PENNSYLVANIA RAILWAY TESTING PLANT, 
WILLAMETTE PULP & PAPER CO., 
ONTARIO POWER CO., 

SCHUYLERVILLE DAM, 

PEDEN IRON & STEEL CO.’S DAM, 
KANKAKEE ELECTRIC LIGHT CO.’S DAM, 
BARTLETT STEEL CoO., 





BLOOMINGTON, ILL. 
: CLEVELAND, 0. | 
DES MOINES, IA. 
CINCINNATI, 0. 
PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
CHICAGO. 
SANDUSKY, O. 
BLACK FOOT, IDAHO. 
NEW ORLEANS. 
NEW ORLEANS. | 
NEW ORLEANS. | 
CHICAGO. | 
PERTH AMBOY, N. J. | 
CHARLESTON, §. C. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. | 
CHATTANOOGA, TENN. | 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. | 
FORT WORTH, TEX. 
ST. LOUIS. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 
CHICAGO. 
ALTOONA, PA. 
LOUISVILLE, KY. 
BALTIMORE, MD. 
JACKSON, MICH. 
WORLD'S FAIR, ST.’ LOUIS. 
OREGON CITY, OREGON. 
ONTARIO. 
SCHUYLERVILLE, N. Y. 
WALLIS, TEX. 
KANKAKEE, ILL. 
JOPLIN, MO. 











167 





LAMBERT - DEACON - HULL 
PRINTING COMPANY 
ST. LOUIS 


AVERY LIBRARY 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 








